I understand... And you will, I hope understand that to me, the condemnation of this woman seems a bit overblown in a world where there are worse crimes than wanting to be a priest.
In this world perhaps, but in the next world, there will be hell to pay. Leading souls astray is not high on the rewards list. In fact, it's waaaaaaaay down at the bottom.
I think I can see where you're coming from. What she wants is a good thing (priesthood) and the way she's going about it doesn't seem criminal, violent, outrageous; in fact it goes along with some of our American individualist cultural values ("Be sure you're right; and then, go ahead" --- Davy Crockett.)
If some of us Catholic FReepers are reacting with a degree of exasperation that surprises you, it may be because we've seen this stuff go on over and over and over for the past, say, 40 years. That is, people making it up as they go along --- people doing their own thing --- people picking and choosing their own gospels, their own creed, their own sacraments, their very own best-guess moral laws, etc. etc. AND saying they're still "good Catholics" because they're so terribly sincere.
What they fail to see is that Catholicism is actually something definite. It's definable. It's tangible. It's solid. It's knowable. It's there.
You can't change what it is by changing your vocabulary list, your costume, or your ever-shifting paradigms. You can't transpose it into the key of Marx. You can't put a tutu on it and call it ballet. You can't canonize Siddhartha or build a shrine to Ayn Rand.
It's Yes or No. Up or Down. Stay or Go. That's it.