My info was from several articles associated with the above link.
Is there a more accepted form of ‘Traditional Catholic’ which more closely abides in faith through Christ? I ask this sincerely.
My post was not to be argumentative, but respectful of many true believers who are Catholics through faith in Christ and hold their love for God through faith in Christ first before they promote other good works.
Recently, I have observed many reports and trends by those who do not have faith in Christ first, but seek to perform good works independent of God, thinking their religious and moral behavior is sufficient for rewards independent of faith in Christ. In other situations, I’ve also seen those who exhibit very antiChristian behavior attempt to build worldly systems in religious garb, riding on the coattails of the name “Catholic” in an attempt to promote false worldly systems counterfeiting God’s plan.
For example, there are many within communist nations such as Castro and Chavez, as well as some Nicaraguan groups which have attempted to substitute socialism for the Gospel. Since the Catholic Church is well recognized, those same groups seem to migrate their socialist priorities into the religious garb of Catholicism to counterfeit a fake gospel to those who have not known better.
The same movements appear to be headed north, perhaps accompanying those aliens encroaching here in the US.
Is the SSPX the same group which incarcerated evangelicals in Chiapas recently?
The source you offer says nothing to support your hatred for Traditional Roman Catholics, but you don't drop your venomous pen at this point. Now you write:
"Is the SSPX the same group which incarcerated evangelicals in Chiapas recently?"
May God have mercy on your lacking sense of spirituality.
Commanding His believers against bearing false witness is instructed by God no less than six times in the Old and New Testaments of the Holy Bible.
I’m sorry for not getting back to you yesterday. The phrase “Traditional Catholics” or “Traditionalist Catholics” when used by Catholics generally simply means Catholics who would prefer to follow the old rite of the Mass (prior to Vatican II). However, there are groups of Catholics who have formed around certain bishops who split from Rome over this issue years ago - those would be groups such as the SSPX that you might have read about. They are considered in schism and are not permitted to use Church facilities, etc., and are not “official” representatives of the Church. Neither type of traditionalist is known for being particularly involved in disputes outside of those within their own church, though.
The only possibility is a small group known as TFP (Tradition, Family and Property) that is active in Latin America and may be more contentious; they occasionally march in the street in protest of various things they don’t like, and are very committed to the defense of private property. However, I haven’t seen anything about their involvement in Chiapas, although it’s not impossible.
I have followed the situation down there for a long time and it’s very complex. Chiapas was the scene of much left-wing activity, both among out-and-out Marxists such as “Comandante Marcos” and among Catholics who were followers of what was known as “Liberation Theology,” which is what you were referring to in your post. In fact the Church there was so bad that the Pope actually replaced the bishop of Chiapas a couple of years ago with someone who was more interested in religion than in Marxism.
Furthermore, various agreements were made between leftist organizers (usually university students from other parts of Mexico) and the Mexican government to do “land reform.” This involved taking supposedly unused portions of land and distributing them to the Indians, as well as applying special taxes to assist with this. However, as you can imagine, this has done nothing but cause confusion and animosity, and there are many personal grudges involved as well. I don’t know the denominational breakdown of the groups involved in this fight, but it’s possible that the various sides do break down roughly on religious lines. However, this is not an official Catholic (or Evangelical) policy.
In addition there’s another factor: there were Muslims from a group in Spain who were working to make converts and were having some success among the Indians who had earlier become Evangelicals, probably because the Evangelical groups form quickly but then have a tendency to splinter and some of their members then get disgusted and reject Christianity altogether. The Muslims were actually expelled by the Mexican government last year because they were operating with foreign funding (not from Spain but from the Middle East and possibly Venezuela) and because they had terrorist connections. However, they did leave behind some groups of Muslim Indians.
Finally, remote rural areas of Latin America, including Mexico, have many people who are not Christians of any kind and never have been. They speak indigenous languages, they speak only fragmentary Spanish, they are virtually uneducated in modern life, and they have never really been evangelized. They are very susceptible to rabble rousing, because somehow the Marxists always manage to get in there. And since the Marxist message is simple and attractive (”everything belongs to you and we’ll take it away from everyone else and give it to you”), this group can become a real problem. This is particularly true since there’s no point of contact because they are not Christians of any kind, Catholic or Evangelical. But the Marxists are cultivating them, and some of the Marxist leaders down there now incorporate pagan rituals into their activities.
In short, I wouldn’t take anything that happens in Chiapas as typical of anything. It’s also very hard to find out what is actually going on there. This is especially the case now, after last fall’s riots when a conservative won the Mexican presidency and the leftist organizers headed out to stir up trouble in areas where they had strong Communist labor-union and university student support (such as Oaxaca). There are still disputes relating to those incidents.
I have been watching the Pope’s trip with great interest, and he addressed the bishops of Latin America quite firmly and told them to get back to religion and evangelization. However, he said that works have to be a part of this, since the disparities between the life of urban, prosperous Latin Americans and that of the rural peasant are so great that Christians have to prove their commitment and attempt to ameliorate things. The Marxists obviously find this a threat, because they do attack Christians who attempt to carry out these works. There was a particularly horrible attack a few years ago where a Catholic woman from a wealthy family, known for her activities on behalf of literacy and the disabled, was kidnapped and buried alive by the Marxists. And the same has happened in places like Bolivia, where Christian lay leaders who are actually doing work to improve the situation of the Indians are regularly killed by the Marxists. Remember, Marxism does not want things to improve, because if they can keep people miserable, they can control them and present themselves as the “saviors of the people.” So the charitable works, while they can never substitute for faith, are very important in missionary activities.
Sorry for the lengthy answer, but you asked some good questions, and this is the situation to the best of my knowledge and as I have seen it. Best wishes!