I found myself most frustrated in my reading of Doehring with her discussion of ethics surrounding dual roles. Certainly there are ethical considerations one needs to have in mind with regard to the possibility that a single pastor may date a member of the congregation. In such an instance, the pastor would need to clearly disclose this relationship to the congregation as well as seek guidance and oversight from the appropriate avenues. Additionally a pastor often holds dual roles with many members through teaching, leading in worship, moderating committees, and counseling individuals. All these roles have the potential to be conflicting with one another. The need for discretion is imperative. During one conversation with my own pastor we were speaking of a particular issue within my family of origin. He asked me if I had heard another member of our church speak about something similar within her own family of origin, something she had been open about in group settings and about which he knew he had permission to, in vague terms, mention to me. He then asked if it was okay with me for him to suggest to her that the two of us talk. This situation would have the potential to break confidences if not handled appropriately. This was navigated by only giving vague details of something disclosed in a group setting, not in private, and then asking my permission to disclose to this other person for the purpose of helping me to find some support. What did bother me about Doehring’s section about dual roles was mainly about how brief it was and how one particular example she used seemed particularly insufficient. This example was describing a pastor in a small town with only one pharmacy in which that pharmacist was a parishioner. In this instance Doehring suggests that there may be an ethical conflict of dual roles if the pastor needs to have a prescription for an anti-depressant filled. Doehring then suggests that the parishioner may be unc