A Diocese of Dallas priest who faces potential removal from the priesthood in disciplinary proceedings related to theft from St. John’s Episcopal Church in Corsicana, Texas, has appealed the case to the churchwide Court of Review, which will hear arguments during an online session Dec. 10.
The Rev. Edward Monk also has been charged separately with three felonies in a pending criminal case alleging he stole more than $300,000 from St. John’s, a congregation about an hour south of Dallas where Monk had served as rector since 2003.
A diocesan investigator reported finding that 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.”
Under The Episcopal Church’s Title IV disciplinary canons for clergy, a diocesan hearing panel concluded in May 2025 that Monk had violated church canons and should be removed from the priesthood.
The diocesan hearing panel found Monk guilty of “conduct unbecoming a member of the clergy” for six financial infractions, including the misappropriation of church funds for personal use.
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.
(It was first tasked to receive clergy appeals in 2018 under canonical changes approved by the 79th General Convention.)
The Court of Review’s session on Monk’s case is set for 3 p.m. Eastern Dec. 10 and will be livestreamed on YouTube.
Documents posted online by the Diocese of Dallas outline some of the steps so far in the appeals process, and they include a list of Monk’s stated grounds for appeal.
In general, Monk, as the respondent, argues that the hearing panel erred in its process, in exceeding its jurisdiction and in interpreting the canons.
“This long train of abuses culminated in the sham hearing of May 27 from which the [hearing panel’s] order issued,” the document says on behalf of Monk.
“The hearing panel insisted on conducting the hearing in a manner that both deprived respondent of his right to effective counsel at the hearing and placed his canonical and constitutional rights in the criminal proceeding in grave jeopardy.”