I think you’re trying to describe far too much complexity in the logline (and possibly the story as a whole) for it to be effective. Consider simplifying the MC, as DPG wrote pick one and make him or her clearly motivated.

If it’s the peeping Tom, you would have to work mighty hard to sell him to the audience as a hero – not only is he a peeping Tom, but he also records his privacy intrusions on tape…

Not sure how you can come back from that, but assuming you still want to (you shouldn’t…), all the layers of descriptions in your explanation mean very little to the audience. Most cinema goers will recognise characters as one of three types: good, bad, and neutral. All the minutia nuances you’re trying for won’t have an effect, if anything, they’ll confuse most decision makers.

If, however, you go with the cat burglar (as DPG rightly advised) you have a morally corrupt character with a redeeming quality – doing the wrong thing for the right reason. This is actually a very powerful tendency to have in your MC – look how many Robin Hood iterations we’ve had over the years.

I myself just had a script optioned that’s about a guy doing the wrong thing for the right reason. I can’t say for sure, but I think that’s one of the reasons the producer wants the IP – it’s the kind of story that often seems to find an audience.

Anyway, this is your story so do what you think is best, but I strongly advise you rethink the concept and write a new version around the cat burglar.

Agreed with Craig and Foxtrot25.

Also, loglines need to describe events that have an effect on the MC and the actions they take, the stakes should be clearly implied instead of literally described. In other words, sentences such as “…When a close connection between his Maori?culture and Christianity?is threatened…” should be replaced with a description of the event that threatened the close connection – otherwise, this becomes a vague statement that sheds very little light on the specifics of the story.

Similarly, “…relinquish his pride and self-motivation at a maximum personal cost…” is too generic to evoke an image in the mind of the reader – it’s best to describe the specific threat so we understand the personal cost.

For example,? I could say ‘A priest struggles with his belief at a great personal cost’, but this lacks detail. Therefore, in a logline I would write something like ‘After a priest finds himself lusting for his neighbour’s husband…’ The personal cost is clear – his belief system is brought into questioned by his own sexual identity, will he uphold the values of the church or be true to himself?