The "and currently identify as homosexuals" part is what needs careful defining. If you mean, "is currently disturbed by a strong cujrrent of homosexual appetite," the answer would be "no." That sort of person isn't fit for a pastoral role.
If you mean "currently identifies with the LGBT subculture or social movement or political advocacy groups," the answer would be "no." That person --- even if they are heterosexual!! --- is advocating things outside of Dvine and Natural Law. I would include "straight" academics or political figures who advocate for gay marriage and the like.
If you mean "currently still finds his spontaneous attractions tend toward men, but he does not cooperate with these attractions in thought, word or deed" --- well then, that's different. That's virtuous. That person can be fairly described as "conforming himself to Christ" --- and that's what the priesthood, indeed the Christian life, is all about.
I agree with you. He should have been more careful when he discussed it with the press.