The depth-psychology corpus treats Imitatio Christi not as a devotional prescription but as a diagnostic problem — a tension between collective religious ideal and the imperative of individual psychological transformation. Jung’s pivotal critique, articulated most sharply in Psychology and Alchemy, holds that the demand of the imitatio to conform outwardly to Christ’s pattern has historically produced the opposite of its intent: rather than developing the inner man, it fixes the divine mediator as an external object, leaving the psyche fragmented and untouched. The remedy Jung proposes — realizing the ideal ‘on one’s own account, Deo concedente, in one’s own individual life’ — effectively transforms imitatio into individuation. Edinger extends this by showing that the first step of individuation — the discrimination between ego and shadow — structurally replicates the imitatio whether consciously sought or not. Von Franz introduces a darker clinical register, observing that literal imitatio Christi, when lived as mortification and ego-abnegation, can become a death-drive that ruins psyche and body alike. Giegerich, reading Jung on his father, notes that the imitatio may be lived unconsciously, without the subject ever recognizing it as such. Within the ascetic tradition represented by Climacus, the term carries an entirely different valence: imitation as surrender, identity-formation through death, and the achievement of a paradoxical simplicity. The corpus thus maps a fundamental polarity between imitatio as psychological inflation or morbid literalism and imitatio as the structural deep grammar of transformation itself.