Your reading of the history of the Cristero War strikes me as being slapdash and simplistic. I am not accusing YOU of intellectual dishonesty, but it looks to me that your sources may be both partial (in the sense of incomplete) and partisan.
As you perhaps know, Canon Law held priests to a "higher standard of perfection" that included the rejection of any form of violence that would result in another person's death. The Code of Canon Law enacted in 1918, prohibited priests from carrying weapons.
In total, five priests took up arms in the Cristero War, in violation of their priestly vocation. A murkier question is whether they were supported by the Bishops of Mexico or the Pope. Officially, the Mexican episcopate never supported the rebellion, but by several accounts, the rebels had the episcopate's acknowledgement that their cause was legitimate.
Many more priests, and some bishops, like Bishop José Francisco Orozco y Jiménez of Guadalajara, firmly rejected armed rebellion, but remained with the rebels because they were unwilling to abandon their people. Some 25 of these were canonized as martyrs in 2000 by Pope John Paul II. (These were priests who did not take up arms, but refused to leave their flocks, and were executed by federal forces.)
Your picture of the Cristeros being first instigated and then betrayed by their priests is similar to many other posters' broad and inaccurate anti-Catholic statements which disfigure the discussion here at Free Republic.
A fuller discussion usually suffices to show these slanders as the distortions they are.
Some of you who are die-hard catholics just can not accept the truth. How sad...to in one sentence acknowledge that I'm telling the truth and in another insinuate I'm lying. It is as it was and I wrote what it was.
Here is a fuller discussion: The priests were with the rebels when they thought they were winning and with the government when they realized the rebellion was going to fail. You are having some severe problems. Seek help immediately.