Dallas priest accused of defrauding his congregation blames lay leaders for poor oversight

[Episcopal News Service] The Diocese of Dallas is trying to remove one of its priests, the Rev. Edward Monk, from the priesthood after criminal and diocesan investigations found he allegedly stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from the congregation he had served for two decades.

In Monk’s appeal of that punishment to the churchwide Court of Review, his lawyer has outlined an alternative scenario at St. John’s Episcopal Church in Corsicana, Texas, instead pointing the blame for the congregation’s financial woes at different culprits: the church’s lay leaders and their poor financial oversight.

“Sloppy bookkeeping, sloppy governance,” the lawyer, Barry Black, told the Court of Review on Dec. 10 during online arguments over Monk’s appeal. “When things go awry, the finger is pointed at the minister.”

Monk, who has been charged with three felonies, is accused of stealing at least $300,000 from St. John’s, including by diverting money intended for the congregation into personal bank accounts he set up for himself and his family members. The diocese’s attorney, George Carlton, countered Black’s description of the case by affirming that the lay leaders are Monk’s victims, not the other way around.

“They trusted him. That was their major mistake,” Carlton said. “He’s guilty. He’s stolen hundreds of thousands of dollars, and he shouldn’t be a priest.”

The Court of Review, however, is not tasked with determining whether the Diocese of Dallas’ disciplinary hearing panel correctly determined Monk’s guilt. The court is reviewing Monk’s arguments that the diocese failed to follow proper procedures under The Episcopal Church’s Title IV canons for clergy discipline when it convened a hearing in May 2025 and concluded that Monk should be deposed, or removed from the priesthood.

Most clergy disciplinary cases are settled at the diocesan level, though respondents are allowed to appeal final rulings to the church’s Court of Review. The court will issue a public opinion on Monk’s appeal at a later date.

On Dec. 10, after spending about an hour listening to Black and Carlton make their arguments, the Court of Review peppered both attorneys with probing questions, sometimes in tones of skepticism and disbelief.

Black, for example, had argued that the diocese’s “statement of offense,” the church’s equivalent to a criminal complaint, was so lacking in details about the allegations that it was nearly impossible for Monk to know what he was accused of doing.

Russ Randle, a Court of Review member from the Diocese of Virginia, pressed Black on that matter.

“Are you contending, sir, that the church attorney’s statement of offense together with a mandatory disclosure that you received … were insufficient notice of the claims against Father Monk?”

“Yes,” Black said.

Later in the session, the Rev. Gregory Jacobs from the Diocese of Newark asked Carlton why the statement of offense did not include more detailed information about the alleged theft and misconduct. Jacobs suggested it should have.

“I have questions with respect to whether this kind of umbrella of allegations is sufficient to give both the court and as well as opposing counsel sufficient notice of the charges against Mr. Monk,” Jacobs said.

“All I can say is I believe it did,” Carlton said.

And Sharon Henes, the Court of Review vice president from the Diocese of Wisconsin, repeatedly questioned Carlton about the transcript from the May hearing, which apparently was created from iPhone audio recordings transcribed later by a court reporter who wasn’t present for the hearing. Direct quotes were missing from numerous portions of the transcript. “Inaudible” was written there instead.

Henes asked if this and other diocesan technological deficiencies may have been factors in the outcome. “There are still significant portions of that transcript where the court reporter filled in ‘inaudible,’” Henes said. “You’re contending that that is a verbatim transcript?”

“Well, no, where it says ‘inaudible,’ that’s not verbatim, but the total of it was that you could tell what was going on. That’s all I can tell you,” Carlton said.

Black also argued that he was deathly ill on the day of the May hearing, but the diocese would not grant the defense’s request to postpone the disciplinary hearing so Monk could be more properly defended.

Monk did not speak during the Court of Review’s session, though he was sitting in the room with Black during the proceedings and briefly appeared in Black’s Zoom window to make clear his attendance.

Monk, 53, is charged in Navarro County Court with three felonies: theft of more than $300,000, use of someone else’s identity to commit fraud and credit card abuse against an elderly victim.

Monk began serving St. John’s in 2003. Police initiated their criminal investigation in July 2024, when St. John’s members reported suspicious financial activity. The Navarro County District Attorney’s Office also requested the assistance of the Texas Attorney General’s financial crimes unit.

Separately, the Diocese of Dallas launched an investigation into the matter and reported finding  Monk had opened unauthorized bank accounts and routed money to other accounts, obtained a credit card under a church treasurer’s Social Security number and “used this card to conduct a multi-year spending spree that included personal trips.”

The diocesan investigator questioned Monk about these discoveries but “did not find Fr. Monk’s explanations, or lack of, to be satisfactory.” Monk continues to deny any wrongdoing.

Black portrayed the diocese’s treatment of Monk as “a shame and a tragedy.” Lay leaders at St. John’s who were supposed to be managing the church’s finances had little to no experience with that kind of work, he said, and therefore, they provided Monk with no guidance on whether he was following proper financial procedures.

Black specifically singled out past testimony by the church’s treasurer, a retired doctor in his 90s, who was unable to answer basic questions about accounting and financial affairs. Black did not mention that the treasurer is the man identified as the victim of alleged elder abuse by Monk.

Monk’s attorney also argued that he was not able to fully present an alternative narrative that might have explained why Monk’s behavior was not a crime or misconduct.

“We might have been able to show that a donor wrote monthly checks to supplement the relatively humble income that the parish was able to pay him, so that he and his wife and his children could live and survive,” Black said.

Carlton objected, saying Black was trying to add new claims into the record, but Laura Russell, the Court of Review president from the Diocese of Newark, allowed Black to continue.

Black concluded by saying that Monk was not given the ability to fully defend himself. Now, it will be up to the Court of Review to decide if that is true.

– David Paulsen is a senior reporter and editor for Episcopal News Service based in Wisconsin. He can be reached at dpaulsen@episcopalchurch.org.