The subjective experience of imitation

If one had to observe the personal experience (fides qua) of individual Christian imitators of Christ, one could note that the subjective perception of imitation may vary substantially from one Christian to another depending on various personal experiences.  For instance, the subjective experience of imitation of:

• a liturgist might emphasize the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. 
• A contemplative person, such as Teresa of Avila, might highlight more on the presence of Christ within oneself. 
• A biblical scholar might underline more the reading of the Gospel texts. 
• A psychologist might focus more on specific traits in Jesus’ character. 
• An illiterate person might focus more on remembering the reading of the gospel heard during the daily or weekly Eucharist and tries to live according to it during the day. 

The previous examples elicit the fact that individual Christians, according to their own “gifts and duties” (Lumen Gentium 41), may collaborate with the grace of imitation differently. It also shows that one way of collaborating with the grace of imitation represents only one part of the totality of possible features. Furthermore, it also shows that subjective experience is necessarily impoverished in some way. For instance, the model of imitation of a biblical scholar, based merely on the reading of the Gospel text, is impoverished in some way if not aware that Christ already dwells within oneself—the experience of the contemplative. On the other way round, if the subjective experience of imitation is based only on a contemplation of the presence of Christ within oneself, this same practice is impoverished in some way since it might risk a wrong interpretation of the words and deeds of Christ.

More than this, the possibility of different understandings in relation to imitation makes it possible to construct a practice of imitation that is incompatible and even contradictory to the words and deeds of Christ themselves. An example of this might be a person responsible for a human trafficking activity who studies Christ’s way of public communication in order to be more persuasive before his or her victims. Although this is a form of subjective practice of imitation, it is inauthentic since it is contradictory to the words and deeds of Christ themselves.  Christ does not teach us to victimise others (human trafficking) but invites us to love our neighbour as ourselves.

All the previously mentioned examples confirm that the subjective practice of imitation could be impoverished and sometimes even incompatible and contradictory to the words and deeds of Christ themselves.