A Title IV clergy disciplinary hearing panel in the Diocese of Dallas has recommended that Episcopal priest Edward Monk be deposed. The decision follows criminal charges that Monk, previously rector of St. John’s, Corsicana, stole over $300,000 from the parish, committed fraud in the third degree, and engaged in credit card abuse. Included in the allegations are charges that Monk, previously chair of the Nashotah House Theological Seminary board, fraudulently opened a credit card using the church treasurer’s social security number and other personal information.
The announcement follows a grand jury indictment, as well as a protracted Title IV process in which Monk’s Title IV attorneys alleged that the Title IV disciplinary proceedings interfere with his Fifth Amendment rights in upcoming criminal proceedings related to the allegations.
Public records also show that, in addition to serving as rector of St. John’s, Monk has been involved with a local charity, Family Service Association, for many years. Further, he has served on Compassion Corsicana, a faith-based non-profit that provides transitional housing and other services to persons in need.
He also has served on the Board of Trustees for the Waco school district.
Our take
While we do not disagree with the outcome of the Title IV case, Anglican Watch has multiple related concerns. Specifically:
- Bishop George Sumner hardly comes to this matter with clean hands. Indeed, his facial violation of church canons (Canon IV.3.1(e)) including his role in retaliating against a priest, Rich Daly, who opposed sexual harassment at St. James, Texarkana, is appalling. Even worse is the corruption in the national church, where the Title IV intake officer for bishops, Barb Kempf, has knowingly sandbagged a complaint against Sumner for his actions.
- Sumner also has covered up for his co-conspirator in the St. James debacle, David Halt, by sandbagging a Title IV complaint against Halt.
- The result is a meltdown at St. James, which Sumner is doing his best to ignore as he gears up to sail into retirement. Whatever happened to being a faithful steward of the church? Or Sumner’s fiduciary obligations per Title IV?
- Internal controls within the Diocese of Dallas appear broken in light of the scale, scope, and duration (more than a decade) of Monk’s alleged theft. The very reason for requiring an annual audit is both to head off massive losses that may not be covered by insurance, and to deter misconduct by making prospective offenders aware that they likely will be quickly caught.
- Relatedly, this situation reflects ineffectual governance on the part of the diocese and Bishop George Sumner. There are reasons for a church hierarchy, and one of those reasons is ensuring adequate oversight of parish financial operations.
- We continue to hear allegations of financial shenanigans at St. James Texarkana, including that laughably feckless rector David Halt is looking for ways to raid the church endowment to cover budget shortfalls. In other words, while we cannot confirm this situation, our fear is that corruption in the Diocese of Dallas runs far beyond what is now known. And that stands to reason, for most organizations are only as ethical as their leaders—and Sumner is crooked as a corkscrew.
- We are somewhat concerned by the discussion in the hearing panel’s documents about members not knowing of the financial, spiritual, and other implications of the Title IV proceeding against Monk. While a pastoral response is, by definition, somewhat isolated from the hearing panel process, the canons claim that a pastoral response is one of the highest and first priorities in a Title IV proceeding. Our experience is that neither the national church nor the Diocese of Dallas pays attention to these issues, and we are mindful that this situation is causing plenty of trauma to all involved. Moreover, we see little evidence that the Diocese is doing anything to care for those hurt by this situation.
- With some experience in auditing, we are confortable predicting that other issues with Monk will surface. For example, auditors talk about the fraud triangle of opportunity, incentive, and rationalization. Those who can justify/rationalize behavior of this sort are almost invariably highly narcissistic, with a huge component of anti-social personality playing a role in their behavior. Thus, if nothing else, we can say with certainty that the culture at St. John’s is troubled. Moreover, it is rare to encounter a situation like this where the perpetrator has not engaged in other instances of theft. So, we encourage other organizations with ties to Monk to closely examine their financial records.
- Much as was the case in the situation with former Episcopal Church treasurer Ellen Cooke, it is difficult to conclude that Monk’s spouse, Virginia Monk, was unaware of his lavish spending, allegedly on personal trips and other luxuries. Public records show that Virginia serves on the adminstration of Texas A&M University-Commerce and previously served with Habitat for Humanity. However, we have not been informed of any criminal charges against her.
- Some of Monk’s alleged conduct amounts to textbook warning signs of embezzlement, including his efforts to keep financial information from his treasurer. Vestry members who do not see timely, complete, accurate financial information, including audit letters and reports, must insist on seeing these data. If it is not forthcoming, by definition the parish and vestry have a serious problem.
- Monk’s full-throated defense against the Title IV charges in this case, while understandable, may prove a bad strategic move when it comes to the criminal charges pending against him. Indeed, it will be difficult for him to contend that he is remorseful or has shown any contrition in this matter, all but guaranteeing that he serve significant jail time. Additionally, he will almost certainly be required to make restitution.
- We reminder readers that one in three churches experience embezzlement. Often, warning signs go unaddressed, while the vast majority of actual crimes go unreported. Moreover, many Episcopal churches have ECW or church school programs that are off-budget, which is highly risky. Indeed, one prominent church with which we are familiar maintains two-thirds of its budget outside the scrutiny of its vestry, while falsely telling members that its school is a legally separate entity. Such situations are ripe for abuse—especially since many dioceses are reluctant to perform forensic audits of churches with questionable financial reporting.
Finally, we extend a caution to anyone considering reporting possible embezzlement in their parish: While you absolutely should report your concerns, it may be best to leave the relevant parish before you do.
Despite the express prohibition on retaliation in the Title IV canons, we have yet to see a situation where these provisions have been taken seriously by judicatories. Indeed, we are prepared to guarantee that you will experience retaliation, both from fellow church members and, in many cases, from church officials.
Our hearts go out to those hurt by this situation.
Barb Kempf is the SIC of Title IV (Sandbagger-in-Chief). She does everything she can to make complaints go away and to make personal attacks against complainants.
She is a good example of someone who lacks skills as a clergy member and who lacks skills as an attorney.
Michael Curry made a bad decision when he hired her to handle Title IV complaints. TEC is culturally unable and unwilling to properly process Title IV complaints. It’s time to hire an outside service to:
1. Complete an audit on TEC’s policies regarding complaints, and
2. Serve as Intake Officer for Title IV complaints.
Church people want to protect their clergy – TEC is not capable of policing its own.
Wholeheartedly agree. Kempf fails to comply with even the basic premise of Title IV, which is that one of the first and highest priorities is a pastoral response, which is NOT the same as pastoral care. Moreover, it is her responsibility at intake to identify those needs and make recommendations accordingly. In most cases, she does not even interview the complainant, so she has no idea what the pastoral needs are.
In Bishop George Sumner’s cases, she has both the details of the case wrong, and the identity of the parties wrong, which makes here dismissal ultra vires, or without meaning. She has been notified this, but instead of having the integrity to correct the mess she has created, she simply ignores it.
So yes, Barb Kempf is, as far as we are concerned, both an incompetent attorney and an incompetent intake officer. Further, she lacks the pastoral presence to be a priest.
It indeed is time to hire an outside service with true independence and a willingness to follow the canons. Right now, Kempf refuses to even follow the canons.
We’re tired of corruption in the Episcopal Church and demand that the denomination muck the filth out of its stalls.
And for the record, if a priest — any priest — engages in allegedly criminal conduct, they must immediately be referred to law enforcement. This business of protecting the church and its reputation is BS and needs to stop.