"Openly gay," huh? That's a laugh. It doesn't even meet the liberal idea of ordaining someone with "homosexual" orientation who (theoretically) renounces the perversion and embraces a chaste, celibate, and non-homosexual life, as questionably advocated by those sympathetic to this. The reason why there are valid "Catholic" concerns about ordaining perverts has something to do with the fact that desiring genital relations with the same gender is gravely disordered whereas the heterosexual impulses of a heterosexual man who becomes a priest are normal. The latter is in accord with natural law, the former is not. Being "openly gay" is to seek to define oneself directly and deliberately in terms of sexual identity. In technical terms, it indicates an inordinate attachment to sensuality inconsistent with a Catholic religious vocation. Desiring to have sex with another man is, shall we say, a rather LARGE red flag in the area of the Catholic priesthood. We don't need any more of that. Whenever this unnatural and disordered desire disfigures the public self-presentation and personality of the man in question to a pathological degree raising concerns that it is beyond his self-control, the psychological fitness for priestly ordination has NOT been achieved. This is just common sense. And a good insurance bet.
Bishops and their staff need to consider the damage that is done to the priesthood and the Church when they place homosexuals in official positions in the Church.
So-called "devout" gay Catholics are unwilling to accept this plain truth.