君子（節譯） 作者：亨利·紐曼
真正的君子在與其周圍的關係上也必同樣避免產生齟齬與衝突——諸如一切意見的衝撞、感情的抵牾、一切拘束、猜忌、抑鬱、憤懣，等等；他所最關心的乃是人人心情舒暢，自由自在。他的心思總是關注著全體人們；對於靦腆的，他便溫柔些；對於隔膜的，他便和氣些；對於荒唐的，他便寬容些；他對正在和自己談話的人屬於什麽脾氣，能時刻不忘；他對那些不合時宜的事情或話題都能盡量留心，以防刺傷對方；另外在交談時既不突出自己，也不令人厭煩。當他施惠與他人時，他盡量把這件事做的平坦，仿佛他自己是個受者而非施者。他一般從不提起自己，除非萬不得已；他絕不靠反唇相譏來維護自己；他把一切誹謗流言都不放在心上；他對一切有損於自己的人從不輕易怪罪，另外對各種行為言論也總是盡量善為解釋。在與人辯論時絲毫也不鄙視偏狹，即不無道理的搶占上風，也不把個人意氣與尖刻詞語當成論據，或在不敢明言時惡毒暗示。
如果他與人涉入任何問題之爭時，他那訓練有素的頭腦總不至於使他出現一些聰明但缺乏教養的人所常犯的那種冒失無禮的缺點；這類人仿佛一把鈍刀那樣，隻知亂砍一通，但卻不中肯綮，他們往往把辯論的要點弄錯，把氣力虛拋在一些瑣細上麵，或者對自己的對手並不理解，因而把問題弄得更加複雜。 （高建譯）
原文
John Henry Newman - A Definition of a Gentleman
HENCE it is that it is almost a definition of a gentleman to say he is one who never inflicts pain. This description is both refined and, as far as it goes, accurate. He is mainly occupied in merely removing the obstacles which hinder the free and unembarrassed action of those about him; and he concurs with their movements rather than takes the initiative himself. His benefits may be considered as parallel to what are called comforts or conveniences in arrangements of a personal nature: like an easy chair or a good fire, which do their part in dispelling cold and fatigue, though nature provides both means of rest and animal heat without them. The true gentleman in like manner carefully avoids what-ever may cause a jar or a jolt in the minds of those with whom he is cast; ・all clashing of opinion, or collision of feeling, all restraint, or suspicion, or gloom, or resentment; his great concern being to make every one at their ease and at home. He has his eyes on all his company; he is tender towards the bashful, gentle towards the distant, and merciful towards the absurd; he can recollect to whom he is speaking; he guards against unseasonable allusions, or topics which may irritate; he is seldom prominent in conversation, and never wearisome. He makes light of favours while he does them, and seems to be receiving when he is conferring. He never speaks of himself except when compelled, never defends himself by a mere retort, he has no ears for slander or gossip, is scrupulous in imputing motives to those who interfere with him, and interprets every thing for the best. He is never mean or little in his disputes, never takes unfair advantage, never mistakes personalities or sharp sayings for arguments, or insinuates evil which he dare not say out. From a long-sighted prudence, he observes the maxim of the ancient sage, that we should ever conduct ourselves towards our enemy as if he were one day to be our friend. Ile has too much good sense to be affronted at insults, he is too well employed to remember injuries, and too indolent to bear malice. He is patient, forbearing, and resigned, on philosophical principles; he submits to pain, because it is inevitable, to bereavement, because it is irreparable, and to death, because it is his des-tiny. If he engages in controversy of any kind, his disciplined intellect preserves him from the blundering discourtesy of better, perhaps, but less educated minds; who, like blunt weapons, tear and hack instead of cutting clean, who mistake the point in argument, waste their strength on trifles, misconceive their adversary, and leave the question more involved than they find it. He may be right or wrong in his opinion, but he is too clear-headed to be unjust; he is as simple as he is forcible, and as brief as he is decisive. Nowhere shall we find greater candour, consideration, indulgence: he throws himself into the minds of his opponents, he accounts for their mistakes. He knows the weakness of human reason as well as its strength, its province and its limits. If he be an unbeliever, he will be too profound and large-minded to ridicule religion or to act against it; he is too wise to be a dogmatist or fanatic in his infidelity. He respects piety and devotion; he even supports institutions as venerable, beautiful, or useful, to which he does not assent; he honours the ministers of religion, and it contents him to decline its mysteries without assailing or denouncing them. He is a friend of religious toleration, and that, not only because his philosophy has taught him to look on all forms of faith with an impartial eye, but also from the gentleness and effeminacy of feeling, which is the attendant on civilization.
Not that he may not hold a religion too, in his own way, even when he is not a Christian. In that case his religion is one of imagination and sentiment; it is the embodiment of those ideas of the sublime, majestic, and beautiful, without which there can be no large philosophy. Sometimes he acknowledges the being of God, sometimes he invests an unknown principle or quality with the attributes of perfection. And this deduction of his reason, or creation of his fancy, he makes the occasion of such excellent thoughts, and the starting-point of so varied and systematic a teaching, that he even seems like a disciple of Christianity itself. From the very accuracy and steadiness of his logical powers, he is able to see what sentiments are consistent in those who hold any religious doctrine at all, and he appears to others to feel and to hold a whole circle of theological truths, which exist in his mind no otherwise than as a number of deductions.
