Pardon me for horning in, but what is your basis for so believing? Other than the accounts which the article posted here disputes as contaminated? Or are you just saying that the article's writer is somehow deluding himself?
By the way, this priest wasn't "gay" if he was celibate, even if he was homosexual. Which hasn't been proven, but has only been claimed by people who have an ideological axe to grind. Mike Barnicle is not what I'd call the gold standard of credibility, as ontos-on has pointed out, and the activists at Dignity, if Fr. Mychal ever spoke to their group (did he? really?) or ministered to them, may have labored under a misapprehension at least as great as the one you impute to the writer.
Care to discuss?