A Framework for Addressing Psychological Inflexibility Among Act Therapists-In-Training.

Novice therapists training in Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) may encounter challenges in therapy in which their own personal history functions as a barrier to flexible modes of therapeutic engagement with the therapist. From the ACT perspective, counter-therapeutic interpersonal responses may be examined relative to six behavioral sub-processes. It is suggested that the most vulnerable moments for the therapist will involve those in which certain contextual features of therapy pull historical awareness of a painful personal past into relation with the psychological present. This paper hypothesizes that utilizing approaches based in ACT will assist therapists in overcoming these challenges and will illustrate how to approach case formulation and intervention with therapists in training from a functional contextualistic perspective. To begin, the philosophical and theoretical underpinnings of ACT will be outlined in sufficient depth to intellectually ground the model and its therapeutic project. This conceptual foundation will then be brought to applied focus using hypothetical case material, followed by ACT interventions designed to increase clinical flexibility in the given therapeutic scenario. Future research that systematically examines the effectiveness of such methods among therapists is encouraged.

Schleiermacher's Doctrine of Biblical Authority: An Alternative to Content-Based/Supernaturalist and Function-Based Rationalist Models

Author: Kerry W. Holton Title: SCHLEIERMACHER’S DOCTRINE OF BIBLICAL AUTHORITY: AN ALTERNATIVE TO CONTENT-BASED/SUPERNATURALIST AND FUNCTION- BASED/RATIONALIST MODELS Advisor: Theodore M. Vial, Jr. Degree Date: August 2015 This dissertation examines Friedrich Schleiermacher’s understanding of biblical authority and argues that, as an alternative to strictly supernaturalistic and rationalistic models, his understanding allows the New Testament to speak authoritatively in Christian religion in an age of critical, historical awareness. After classifying Schleiermacher’s position in a typology of the doctrine of biblical authority, this dissertation explores his conception of divine revelation and inspiration vis-à-vis scripture. It demonstrates that although he did not believe there is warrant for the claim of a direct connection between divine revelation and scripture, or that scripture is the foundation of faith, he nonetheless asserted that the New Testament is authoritative. He asserted the normative authority of the New Testament on the basis that it is the first presentation of Christian faith. This dissertation examines Schleiermacher’s “canon within the canon,” as well as his denial that the Old Testament shares the same normative worth and inspiration of the New. Although this dissertation finds difficulty with some of Schleiermacher’s views regarding the Old Testament, it names two significant strengths of what is identified as his evangelical, content-based, and rationalist approach to biblical authority. First, it recognizes and values the co-presence and co-activity of the supernatural and the natural !ii in the production of the New Testament canon. This allows both scripture and the church to share religious authority. Second, it allows Christian faith and the historical-method to coexist, as it does not require people to contradict what they know to be the case about science, history, and philosophy. Thus, this dissertation asserts that Schleiermacher’s understanding of biblical authority is a robust one, since, for him, the authority of scripture does not lie in some property of the texts themselves that historians or unbelievers can take away.