He wanted to keep Don out of student ministries while keeping this issue confidential.
When institutions entrusted with the moral formation of the young receive warnings and choose silence over protection, the consequences can span decades. A man now living in British Columbia has brought a civil lawsuit against Chapelstreet Church in Geneva, Illinois, alleging that a youth leader sexually abused him throughout his childhood — years after the church's senior pastor had been told of an earlier allegation against the very same man. The case asks a question as old as organized community itself: what obligation does a congregation bear when it holds knowledge that could shield the vulnerable, and what becomes of that obligation when it is quietly set aside?
- A 21-year-old man alleges he was repeatedly abused by a church youth leader from ages roughly 6 to 15, while his missionary parents trusted that leader enough to house their family during summer visits.
- The church's senior pastor had been warned in 2010 about a prior abuse allegation dating to 1983 — complete with written correspondence in which the accused appeared to acknowledge causing harm — yet no public warning was ever issued to the congregation.
- After promising the earlier victim that he would escalate the matter to church elders and remove the youth leader from ministry, the pastor's follow-through amounted to a quiet, unannounced sabbatical that left the accused in contact with children.
- The lawsuit, filed in Kane County court, now seeks accountability from three parties — the accused leader, the pastor, and the institution itself — for negligent retention, failure to supervise, and failure to warn.
- No criminal charges have been filed in Kane County, the accused no longer appears on the church's website, and neither the church nor its leadership has responded publicly to the allegations.
A man now living in British Columbia has filed a civil lawsuit against Chapelstreet Church in Geneva, Illinois, alleging that youth leader Don Vanthournout of St. Charles Township sexually abused him repeatedly between 2011 and 2018 — beginning when he was a young child. The plaintiff, identified only as John Doe and now 21, also names the church and its interim lead pastor, Brian Coffey, in the filing.
John Doe's parents were missionaries who returned to Chapelstreet in 2011 with their two young sons and stayed at Vanthournout's home during summer furloughs. The lawsuit alleges Vanthournout exploited that domestic proximity to carry out years of abuse. What gives the case its particular weight is that Coffey had already been warned about Vanthournout a year before the family arrived.
In April 2010, a man who said Vanthournout had abused him in 1983 — when he was 14 and Vanthournout took him to a Colorado cabin for a week — met with Coffey at the church's Geneva campus. He brought letters the two men had exchanged years earlier, including one in which Vanthournout appeared to acknowledge the harm he had caused. Coffey reportedly assured the man he would bring the matter to the church's Senior Elders and take appropriate action.
That September, after spotting a Chicago Tribune article quoting Vanthournout as a youth discipleship figure, the earlier victim emailed Coffey again. Coffey replied that Vanthournout had been asked to take a sabbatical from student ministry that June, and that he intended to confront him and allow him to quietly resign. Despite those stated intentions, the lawsuit contends Vanthournout was never meaningfully removed from contact with children — and it was during this window that John Doe's family began staying at his home.
The lawsuit argues the church and Coffey failed in their duty to warn the congregation, leaving minors exposed to a man whose history of abuse had been documented and disclosed. The case seeks more than $50,000 from Vanthournout directly, with separate negligence counts against both the church and Coffey. No criminal charges have been filed. Vanthournout, Coffey, and church leadership have not responded to requests for comment. The suit was filed October 21 in Kane County court.
A man now living in British Columbia has filed a civil lawsuit against Chapelstreet Church in Geneva, claiming that a youth leader sexually abused him repeatedly between 2011 and 2018—years after the church's senior pastor had been told of an earlier allegation against the same man. The plaintiff, identified in court documents only as John Doe and now 21 years old, names the church itself, interim lead pastor Brian Coffey, and Don Vanthournout of St. Charles Township, who worked in various youth and student ministry roles at the congregation.
The abuse allegations span seven years, beginning when John Doe was a child. His parents were missionaries who returned to Chapelstreet in 2011 with their two young sons, ages 6 and 8 at the time, and stayed at Vanthournout's house during summer furloughs. The lawsuit asserts that Vanthournout used this proximity to subject the boy to repeated sexual abuse throughout that period. What makes the case particularly damning, according to the filing, is that Coffey had already been informed in 2010 of a prior sexual abuse claim against Vanthournout—one dating back to 1983, when another boy was 14 years old.
That earlier victim had attended youth group with Vanthournout at a different Baptist church in St. Charles. In 1983, Vanthournout, then in his 20s, took the boy to a cabin in Colorado for about a week, where the alleged abuse occurred. The victim carried that trauma for decades. When both men later found themselves at Chapelstreet, the victim reached out to Vanthournout in 2007 with a letter describing what had happened and asking for an apology. Vanthournout responded in writing, acknowledging the harm he had caused and asking what compensation would be appropriate—a tacit admission that appeared to validate the victim's account.
By April 2010, the earlier victim grew alarmed that Vanthournout remained active in Chapelstreet's youth programs. He sent an email to Coffey and met with him at the church's east campus in Geneva, sharing the letters exchanged with Vanthournout and recounting the 1983 abuse. According to the lawsuit, Coffey assured the man that he would bring the matter to the church's Senior Elders and that appropriate measures would be taken. The victim left that meeting believing the church would act to protect its children.
But the church's response proved inadequate. In September 2010, after seeing a Chicago Tribune article quoting Vanthournout as a discipleship leader discussing how children could talk to him about sensitive topics, the victim emailed Coffey again with renewed concerns. Coffey replied that Vanthournout had been asked to take a sabbatical from student ministry that June. In his email, Coffey wrote that he wanted to keep Vanthournout out of student ministries while keeping the matter confidential, and that he planned to confront Vanthournout and give him a chance to quietly resign. Yet despite these stated intentions, the lawsuit claims Vanthournout was allowed to maintain contact with children at the church. It was during this period that John Doe's family stayed at Vanthournout's house, and the alleged abuse of the younger boy began.
The lawsuit argues that Coffey and Chapelstreet failed to take meaningful steps to warn the congregation about Vanthournout's documented history of sexual abuse. The church, the filing states, was aware or should have been aware that John Doe and other minors were at risk of being groomed and abused. The institution had a duty to prevent Vanthournout from having access to children, yet it did not fulfill that duty. The case seeks more than $50,000 from Vanthournout for the alleged child sexual abuse, and separate counts of negligence against both the church and Coffey for retaining him and failing to supervise or warn members of the congregation.
Vanthournout has not been charged with any criminal offense in Kane County, according to court records. He does not currently appear on Chapelstreet's website as a staff or youth leader, though it is unclear when he left the position. Vanthournout could not be reached for comment, and neither Coffey nor other church leaders have responded to requests for comment. The church, formerly known as the First Baptist Church of Geneva, rebranded itself Chapelstreet in 2017 and now operates locations in Geneva, Blackberry Township, and North Aurora. The lawsuit was filed on October 21 in Kane County court.
Citas Notables
I want to keep Don out of student ministries while also keeping this issue as confidential as possible. As the fall moves on I am probably going to confront Don with what I know and give him the chance to quietly turn his sabbatical into a resignation from all student ministries.— Pastor Brian Coffey, in an email to the prior victim in September 2010
I feel horrible that you have suffered as you have because of me. What would be an appropriate amount of compensation?— Don Vanthournout, in a written response to the 1983 abuse victim in 2007
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does it matter that the pastor said he would take action in 2010 if the abuse didn't start until 2011?
Because the lawsuit argues he didn't actually take meaningful action. He said Vanthournout would take a sabbatical, but the man was apparently still allowed around children. When the victim's family arrived in 2011, Vanthournout had access to their kids.
So the church knew there was a risk and did nothing to prevent it?
That's what the lawsuit claims. The earlier victim had shown Coffey letters where Vanthournout essentially admitted to abusing him in 1983. Coffey assured the victim something would be done. But then Vanthournout stayed in contact with minors.
Did Vanthournout ever deny the 1983 abuse?
No. When the victim reached out in 2007, Vanthournout wrote back apologizing and asking what compensation would be appropriate. That's a confession, essentially. So by 2010, Coffey knew this man had admitted to sexually abusing a child.
And yet he remained in youth ministry?
According to the lawsuit, yes. Coffey said he'd asked Vanthournout to take a sabbatical, but the lawsuit argues that wasn't enough. The man was still around children. The plaintiff's family stayed at his house for extended periods.
What does the church say about all this?
They haven't responded. Neither Coffey nor other church leaders have answered requests for comment. No attorney has appeared in court for them yet either.