Part 1

In the context of disturbing facts–of the worst depravity–of which we have all become aware, as to evil acts of sexual abuse by priests, elites and others, going as far as outright Satanism. I have been thinking for several years that what follows should be widely known, and carefully examined. This is not to pass judgment on the author of the following discourse (to whom such intentions should not be lent without evidence), but rather to question its theological basis. It is, indeed, a very problematic theological position, which perverts the sacrament of Jesus (the Eucharist) by associating it with the sexual act. This should not be trivialized, as the author certainly did not invent this theology, which must be of ancient occult origin, and the implications are far-reaching.

In this particular case, the author is Jean Tremblay, a former mayor of a large town in the province of Quebec, Canada, (re-elected from 1997 to 2017) who became known for his fight, in 2014-2015, up to the Canadian Supreme Court for the right to make a public prayer at the opening of the municipal council. Nothing really concerning about that. The concern is rather about the less known, and infamous, "penetration of the Lord" that Mr. Tremblay introduced in his book, "Believe, it changes everything", as part of his very personal, unconventional, theological view, and whic he discussed in an interview on the Denis Lévesque program on TVA, January 21, 2014. The interview immediately followed the publication of the book. I provide an English translation below. I also provide a transcription of the original interview in French at the following link.

VIDEO LINK OF THE ORIGINAL INTERVIEW:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9NwrRRUHIM

TRANSCRIPTION IN FRENCH:

https://pastebin.com/eHYUnZgb

Despite an awkward attempt by Tremblay at watering down the inherent perversion of his theological assertion, for people who know the ins and outs of the matter, associating the Eucharist with the sex act and with penetration, as he does, is tantamount in itself to justifying sexual abuse by priests, and even, black masses, when including not only Christ's body, but also the blood. As it is well known, sadly, many of those who were interned in residential schools in their childhood around the world have filed complaints of abuse by priests (sexual "Eucharist").

Overall, if we remove his twisted association of the Eucharist with sex, Mr. Tremblay's discourse is largely banal, naive, and irrelevant. On the one hand, he falsely attributes his unorthodox assertion to Jesus himself. On the other hand, he clumsily tries to divert attention from the gravity of this by making a false debate about perfectly normal sex. The host, Denis Levesque, matter-of-factly points out that nobody thinks of sex as a sin when done in the right way, as a couple, between a man and a woman, for the purpose of procreation.

TRANSLATION OF THE INTERVIEW:

DL = Denis Lévesque, talk show host, TVA

JT = Jean Tremblay

DL - A whole statement there. People said, "Look, what the hell is the mayor talking to us about penetration the same way, he who spoke of the Eucharist?"

Part 2

>>8893422

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9NwrRRUHIM

TRANSLATION OF THE INTERVIEW:

DL = Denis Lévesque, talk show host, TVA

JT = Jean Tremblay

DL - A whole statement there. People said, "Look, what the hell is the mayor talking to us about penetration the same way, he who spoke of the Eucharist?"

JT - Well yes, when Christ said: "He who eats my flesh shall have eternal life …" If you received Him today, and then he declared this to you for the first time, you would be without doubt surprised. Yet it made history, it turned the world upside down: "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood shall have eternal life." One should stop… [seeing this thing in a negative way]

DL - So, "Eat my flesh", you think He, Himself, He was talking about what, eating what?

JT - Well, that's it, it's really his flesh. It is because… I will tell you what… It is that we have come to see sex as a sin, as something… Yes, it can be a sin, but it is not necessarily. We all come from a sexual act. So we have to stop seeing this thing in a negative way. It can be negative if we don't do it in the context of good things, but it is not us who invented sex.

DL - But admit that a mayor who makes his mark at the Canadian level–because you make people talk about you across Canada,–because you are fighting for the right to pray at your municipal council. A mayor who writes books on religion, who says that he prays in his life, who shows his beliefs on the public scene, and who, at the same time, extols the virtues of penetration: it's surprising!

JT - Well yes! It is not at all. It is that we deviated, we slipped at one point. I said to the journalist who had listened to this: "You make me think of a child, as soon as… Myself, when I was 7, and I heard the word 'penis', well, I started to laugh. But there's nothing funny about it. We were created by God, everyone, and we have to procreate ourselves. And the sexual act is probably one of the most significant gestures that there is not. Now, we often slip in the sexual domain, but if there is something worthy and beautiful… It was not us who invented that, the sexual act. It was invented. It is God. And then, as for ourselves, we just kept doing it. I think there’s nothing more beautiful. That’s what I was telling them. Everything that penetrates us… it is written, that. Christ said: "Everything that penetrates us…" It is true that if you go to a restaurant, they will put your plate as beautiful as possible, because the more beautiful your plate, the more it gives you appetite. But, it's… it's good. Then when you go to communion, what do you do? God penetrates you. But that's what He wants: to penetrate into us. It is something beautiful. You should not always see something negative. For example, when I said "eating an apple", there is someone (I was speaking to the presenter after that), the word "eating", they immediately think of something else. But I said, it's obsessed with sex, that. When I talk about eating, I don't think about that.

[PART 3 FOLLOWS]

Part 3 (last part)

>>8893422 Part 1

>>8893467 Part 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9NwrRRUHIM

DL - No, but when we talk about… We just talked about penetration in terms… Well, the penetration of which you speak at the beginning of your statement, it is indeed penetration [JT: "sexual"] of the penis into the vagina? This is what you are talking about. [JT: "Well, yes."] And the next sentence, you say "We eat apples". So, the host, he is not a fool either. You are talking about sex, then right after, you fall into the eating of apples.

JT - Well, it's because… Yes, but I don't see a contradiction. As soon as we talk about sex, we think of sin. Well, myself, I do not have the impression that when I have a sexual act with my wife, I make a sin.

DL - No, no, Mr. Mayor, wait. I do not see any sin in the sexual act. [JT: "No?"] What I find curious is that someone who speaks in terms of sin, someone who speaks in terms of paradise, in terms [JT: "Yes?"] of religion, him, he can speak as openly about penetration at the same time as he speaks to me about the Eucharist. [JT: "But why?"] It's new. For me, it's new. [JT: "Well, that's good."] I don't see Cardinal Turcotte talking to me about penetration at the same time as he is talking to me about the Eucharist. I never heard that from a priest, right.

JT - Well, I don't see anything wrong with that, and then I don't see… It's quite… It's nature. Nature, everything there is in nature, all the actions we take, we have not invented. The way in which nature is renewed, it is God. It is the work of God. And then, the sexual act, in a normal setting, is something very worthy, very beautiful. We degraded that, and then we made it low. Then when we talk about sex, often it is with a vocabulary that is degrading. But no, we should value the sexual act in the normal course of things. Children who are born; we ourselves are born thanks to that. And it is not that different when we speak of the Eucharist: Christ who penetrates us. It’s beautiful, it’s, it’s… We don’t stop to think about it enough, and we no longer believe that in the Eucharist, there is really, really… it’s the Christ who penetrates us. For believers like me, those who believe in God, this is a very significant gesture that must be valued.

[From his discourse, there is no doubt that when Tremblay says God/Christ 'penetrates' us (through the Eucharist), it is clear that he means 'sexually'. That's what he says right from the beginning.]

[END OF TEXT]