# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1953_S1021
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

250 SEMINARIES AND COLLEGES

of achieving accreditation, requirements of maintain;

tation, additions which § i B accredi
program, etc.). Ynod required the School to make to its

ACTION
Upon recommendation of Committee 1 Synod reso]
Olved:

W Resolution 37
HEREAS, Committee No.1 which se
, t .1, rved S
waukee Convention, inadvertently ‘neglected to pe mee Ma.
owing resolution to the Milwaukee Convention: theref the ‘fol.
' Resolved, That.the title of this section be chan; ale
or Advanced Study”; and be it further Bed to

Resolved, That the section read: “6.69, Grants

“Gran; ts

for Ad
d’s colleges and se iene

involved (e.g., addition of courses, request to assist i. i
brary,

guidance work requirements ievi
ork, re of achieving accreditati i
ments of maintaining accreditation, additions which § n 4 reguind
e school to make to its program, etc.) . Ynoe red

Election of Professors |
Handbook Section 6.117

The 1947 convention of Synod approved several basic changes

the present procedure in any w posal
t E e y way. The purpose of this
is to joleet in Synod’s official Handbook such clarification “as th
resident of Synod, in accordance with the duty specifically
aengned to him, has found it necessary to convey at the beginning :
each new election meeting during the Past two trienniums.
In approving the changes recommended to the 1947 convention,

Synod found it desirable, als
2 = » also, to recognize the basic administrati:
Philosophy of the. accrediting associations and to accept them 7

SEMINARIES AND COLLEGES 251
nt that Synod’s distinctive objectives permitted. Accord-
{Synod has assigned specific duties to college and seminary
ierits or faculty committees, as the case may be, in Handbook
; 6.103 and 6.105; however, these provisions carefully safe-
“the principle that all conclusions reached by president or
; committee are subject to review, modification, or rejection
se electors. _ ‘
”“aftter the recommendations have been properly prepared in
gedordance with the basic criteria specified in Handbook Section
6,103; the electors are not free to make arbitrary selections from
the'list of unrecommended nominees; however, they do have both
the right and the duty to canvass the data on every nominee with
the’ purpose of determining whether, in their judgment, the
~ sident’s list should be amended. If, by mutual consent, there
are additional qualified nominees, the president amends his list to
include the additional candidates. In any case in which the electors
conclude that no candidate on the original or on the amended list
of recommendations can properly be elected to the position involved
or that no listed candidate can be elected without extensively
compromising the performance of some other vital aspect of
Synod’s work, they have the right and the duty to reject all of
' the recommendations and to request the Board of Control to issue
a new call for nominations.

The procedures detailed above are now in use at all elections
and have been accepted as a correct interpretation by the electors;
however, since the detail is not specifically reflected in Section 6.117,
and since changes of personnel in the various local or synodical
administrations might occasion some conflicting interpretations, it
is felt that a clarification of this section will contribute to Synod’s
welfare and provide desirable continuity in the application of this
very important section of Synod’s constitutional law.

There have also been some misgivings in connection with the
statement as it now appears in Section 6.117, that the electors shall
elect the “person best qualified for the position to be filled,” since -
a literal application of the statement might conceivably bring some
harm to the general welfare of other important areas of church
work. Accordingly, the Board for Higher Education

Recommends that Section 6.117 be clarified by adding, after the
words “elected from” in line 6, the words “the list of candidates as
originally proposed by the President or as amended by him after
mutual consent with the electors, as the case may be”; and the
Board for Higher Education ;

Recommends, further, that the words “among the candidates”
in lines 6 and 7 be deleted; and the Board for Higher Education