A "risk of indistinction" that must nevertheless be run, and a crucial "ecclesial or sacramental symbolization" that must nevertheless take only abstract forms

Jesuits of Canada

      "This profusion [(pluralization)] of relations"

—i.e. "The profusion [(pluralization)] of lifestyles and partnerships, the rise in life-expectancy [(l'allongement de l'existence)], the demand of some homosexuals for recognition, the presence of remarried divorcées in their difference [with]in the bosom of the Christian community, etc., . . . hospitality (cf. Heb 13:2) having become the principal mark of an eschatological credibility" (403)—,

"it should be recognized, entails clearly the risk of indistinction[.  For] ahead of every other reflection on relations [and every commitment to the sort of "relational" as distinguished from "ontological" "logic" (401) that I am arguing for, and that seems closer to "that symbolization of the distinction between the sexes via the [profusion of] states of life" that we encounter in "the letters to the Corinthians" (403)], Paul brought his authority violently into action against a case of incest in the bosom of the Corinthian community (1 Cor 5).  The ecclesial or sacramental symbolization of [(des)] differences [with]in [the context of (dans)] baptismal equality remains therefore decisive, even if it must find, in the framework of our cultural context, new forms of expression.  For however that may be [(quoi qu'il en soit)], the «eschatological concentration» of the time and the manifestation of the unicity of an existence envisaged as a whole implies an act of faith that consents to them [(y consent)] joyously and decisions of [an] irrevocable type that ratify the Christic bond, [a] bond that once [and] for all precedes our differences, as incommensurable as they may be.  Indissoluble marriage, but also other types of bonds or radical fidelities, founded on a [(la)] faith in the humanizing power of irrevocable decisions, are, though never capable of exempting us from the [(sans jamais pouvoir s'exempter des)] apprenticeships and new developments [(rebondissements)] of life, the «charismatic» expression of that eschatological bond that is Christ."

     Christoph Theobald, "Pour une anthropologie théologique de la difference," Recherches de science religieuse 102, no. 3 (2014):  404 (385-407), except where otherwise noted, translation, all underscoring, and every misunderstanding, mine.
     405:  "That inversion, scarcely probable in our societies, but possible, implies for theology that it allow itself to be dislodged from the tranquil possession of a «common law», in order to come face-to-face with human complexity, as perceived in the Book of the generations [that lies behind Gen 5:1-32 and 11:10-26], [all the while] accepting that one does not know from the get-go what is normal and what is abnormal, what is human and what is not. . . ."
    401:  "Let us recall that the more or less concrete description of «the alternative space» put in place by the first Christian communities makes the isolation of the distinction of the sexes, which is to say the idea of the couple as a pre-social, originating, or natural entity, impossible.  Instead we are faced with a «plurality of relational forms mediated by the distinction of the sexes» in the bosom of an ensemble of social markers that largely transcend that differentiation, the comprehensively important thing being to give an eschatological form or style to all of the meaningful relations, founded on the «ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ».  An anthropology of the Maussian tradition that precisely refuses to start with an identitary classification of beings and substitutes for it an [(l')] entry via a relational logic [that] has no trouble describing that multi-form space and comparing it with others.  The question of personal identity under its current form, whether of «gender identity» or of «sexual identity», is not or not yet posed in [this multiform space]; [what is posed is] really only [(bien que)] the singularization by divine filiation in the bosom of the communitarian i.e. determinative bond."
     402:  "Without absolving St. Thomas [Aquinas] of his patriarchal conception of man/woman relations, one can adhere to the biblical desacralization of bisexuality that he inherited, i.e. the secularization of it that he promotes.  The necessary displacement [would] consist, however, in extricating the «male and female he created them» from its ontological status and in noting with biblical exegesis (and already K. Barth) that the «one flesh» of Gen 2:24 is not speaking of the conjugal union (and even less of the child), but, as the Song of Songs, of the bond between the man and the woman, [a] bond that, following the book of generations (Tolédôt), implicates other types of differences, those between generations, the story of which does not cease to follow complex twists and turns.  It emphasizes thus the opening up [(désenclavement)] of relations, the plurality of their forms [(figures)], and, above all, the mutation that they undergo over the course of life-spans."  Etc.