If denominations maintain a registry of their “good guys” and “bad guys,” some would swear that Crawford Howell Toy ranks first among Southern Baptist “bad guys.” Others claim that Toy has been victimized by bad press and under slightly different circumstances he would be numbered among the “good guys.” In Crawford Howell Toy: The Man, the Scholar, the Teacher, Mikeal Parsons argues that Toy defies simplistic labels like hero or heretic, and he makes a convincing case for Toy being among the most complicated figures in Southern Baptist history.

So, who was Crawford Toy? Past inquiries have tended to be tangential, largely because they linked Toy to Lottie Moon and/or Unitarianism rather than focusing on Toy himself. As such, Toy's tarnished legacy is grounded more in myth than actual history. One variation of the Toy myth goes something like this: Toy was a brilliant young seminary professor. He and missionary heroine Lottie Moon were engaged to be married, but Moon spurned him when she discovered that he denied key tenets of the Christian faith. From there, Toy was tearfully and reluctantly dismissed from Southern Seminary, whereupon he relocated to Harvard and ultimately became a Unitarian.

There are variations of the Toy myth, but their basic story lines are all similar and misleading. For openers, Parsons shows that the romance between Moon and Toy has been greatly exaggerated, if not fabricated altogether. True, they knew each other, but accounts of the romance come from secondary sources, not the alleged participants. Parsons claims that Toy's dismissal from Southern Seminary has also been exaggerated. According to myth, Southern's president, James Petigru Boyce, embraced him and claimed he would give his right arm if Toy would believe as he once had. But in mining William H. Whitsitt's diary, Parsons discovered that Toy and Boyce had probably never really been on good terms. Whitsitt had been Toy's colleague and roommate in Louisville. If anyone knew Toy, it was Whitsitt, and if his diary is correct, Boyce saw Toy as a liability rather than an asset for Southern Seminary. Curiously, even after he left Southern, Toy maintained a cordial relationship with denominational icon John Broadus, whose views may not have differed dramatically from Toy's. Parsons's account of Toy and his time at Southern is worth the book's $35.00 price tag.

Once at Harvard, Crawford Toy thrived. That aspect of the Toy myth is relatively accurate. Toy proved that he was a productive scholar, and by all accounts he was a dedicated friend, a fine colleague, and an upright citizen. In 1888 he married Nancy Saunders, a woman who apparently had her own social agenda. If so, that may help explain Toy's alleged Unitarianism. Being a Unitarian in Boston had certain social advantages, and though Toy had been a member of a Baptist church, he may have asked to be removed from its membership role so he and Nancy could attend services at the First Parish Church and rub elbows with Boston's elite. In fairness to Toy, however, Parsons observes that according to existing records, Toy never officially united with any Unitarian congregation.

Writing biography may be one of the most difficult tasks any writer can attempt. That said, Crawford Howell Toy: The Man, the Scholar, the Teacher is occasionally uneven. For instance, the differences between biblical inerrancy as a theological tenet and hermeneutics as an understanding and application of scripture occasionally get blurred. This may be because Crawford Toy was such a complicated person and his writings reflect as much. On the other hand, it might also be due in part to the author's method. Parsons admits that he is neither a historian nor a biographer, per se, and he was not attempting to write a critical biography. Rather, he relied on numerous, extended direct quotes from previously untapped sources. He concedes early on that he may have used too many, but Parsons states he wanted to offer an abundant sampling of primary material so readers might assess Toy for themselves. These criticisms are minor and do not detract from this book's overall value for readers. As for his own understanding of Toy, Parsons says that his study helped him better understand Toy as a scholar, but “I cannot claim to have fully understood his complex personality” (xvi). Maybe not, but Parsons has provided a resource that will surely be the starting point for any future inquiry.

Readers will find much to ponder in Crawford Howell Toy: The Man, the Scholar, the Teacher. Likely, they will not agree with many of his conclusions, but Mikael Parsons provides interested parties a glimpse of Crawford Toy that goes well beyond mere denominational lore. In Parsons's hands, Toy is more than either a heretic or a hero. Toy is a devoted family man, a scholar, an exemplary colleague, teacher, and friend—a real person as opposed to a symbol. In the end, this book likely raises as many questions as it answers, but in this reviewer's opinion, good books tend to do that.