Should all Christians be evil Anglicists?

According to Webster's New World College Dictionary, 4th Edition, an "Anglicist" is "A student of or authority on the English language and literature."

It is not a requirement for a Christian to be an Anglicist. If said Christian is in a position where conversing in English is required, it would be good to have familiarity with the language. Usually, Christians do not have to be authorities on English, especially those who live where English is not the predominant language.

If a Christian does feel the Holy Spirit's leading to become an Anglicist, should said Christian do so in an "evil" way? I'm going to say yes.

First, know that there are two different types of "evil": moral evil, like the act of stealing the last gluten-free cupcake from the breakroom when I CLEARLY MARKED IT, JEFF. And natural evil, like hurricanes.

One might think English, with its forty-seven different verb tenses and absolute lack of spelling consistency, would be a moral evil. Alas, the theory that it has followed foreign languages into dark allies, clubbed them over the head, and stolen their participles would suggest just that. I posit, however, that the English language is a natural evil that has evolved over hundreds of years, swapping pronouns like gifts at a while elephant and trying out different ways to pronounce "f."

So, it would help the scholar of the English language to have a vein of natural evil in her or his disposition. It's difficult to be an expert in something with which you have nothing in common. I do caution, however, against spending copious amounts of time and effort attempting to convince others to share your obsession. If you're going to be an Evangelical, share the gospel, not the grammar.

---