Ahh but pure intent itself is “an intimate connection betwixt the near-purity of the sincerity of naiveté and the pristine-purity of that actual innocence which is inherent to living life as a flesh-and-blood body only” [link]!
Hence you are describing what “the connection to an intimate connection” is, which is not quite right is it?
It’s a bit tricky, the key is that pure intent is both that “pristine-purity” itself[1], and the ‘connection’ between one’s naiveté and that purity.
The reason is that there is no difference between that purity which one is when fully free, and the purity which a feeling-being can experience and pulls one towards that destiny – it is, in essence, the very same thing.
To help make sense of it, I recommend reading Richard’s entire July 6 2015 post to Martin, complete with the full extensive context included therein: [link].
What is critical to understand is that pure intent has nothing to do with ‘me’, it is entirely outside of ‘me’ – hence no action that ‘I’ can take, be it a revival or a rememoration or anything else, can be what pure intent is. The closest accurate point to what you wrote (the minimal edit distance) would be to say that the action of rememoration is what allowing pure intent is – which I would probably agree with, I would have to think a bit more about whether there are ‘other’ ways to allow pure intent, or if they all essentially amount to that (rememoration).
The purity of the PCE provides an irresistable draw to those who allow it – yet together with that draw can come a deep dread as one instinctively understands that it will be the end of me (even if this be not a conscious thought), hence there are possibly a lot of forces (subconscious or otherwise) at play in one’s psyche to pull one away from understanding all this, even if one be feeling one is earnestly pursuing a pragmatic and straightforward approach to it all.
To be taking ‘me’ or any action ‘I’ take to be pure intent, is such an action, as this places the entire liberative impetus and freeing mechanism firmly on the side of the human condition, where it will never work.
The key is to tilt it the other way, to experience pure intent as it is, strictly on the ‘other’ side of ‘me’, ie outside the human condition, on the side of actuality. Then one is well on the path.
This can be immensely unsatisfying as it is not possible to appropriately conceptualize it. How can ‘I’ take some action to experience that which is outside of ‘me’? How can ‘I’ experience anything outside of ‘me’ at all? How can ‘I’ be connected to that which has naught to do with ‘me’? I don’t exactly know “how it works”… and Geoffrey indicated to me that he never really had a satisfying answer, until he was already outside of the human condition (he is satisfied now 
).
The key is that it’s experiential, so the way to do it is to experience it, which means having a PCE and rolling out that golden clew as one winds one’s way back to where one normally is. It doesn’t mean to shut off one’s thinking in a spiritual repression way, just rather to redirect one’s efforts thataway, then, with the experience actively occurring, it will be possible to describe it, at least in a way that will make sense to someone else already experiencing it 
.
Cheers,
Claudiu