I posted a copy of his Autobiography here, lest that obscure German website go offline ...
https://www.cathinfo.com/the-library/autobiography-of-archbishop-thuc/

There's amazing stuff in there, including about how his family were martyred under the Communists, and his one brother was double-crossed, told he'd be taken by America but then delivered right into the hands of the same Vietnamese who had killed the rest of his family.  He was flushed out of hiding with promises of help by a "Catholic" American consul.

That was a good idea to post it here. Looking forward to reading it. Thank you Ladislaus.

                                        Guerard Des Lauries and Arch.Pedro Martin Ngo-Dinh-Thuc

Thanks for the great picture.  I knew someone who served Mass regularly for Archbishop Thuc while he was with +Vezelis, and he said that the Archbishop (in addition to being very kind and humble) offered Mass very devoutly, and that comes across in this picture.

Actually, this book cnannot be recommended. It is a work of calumny against Bishop Thuc. The author is an Anglican "priest" of sorts who is not a friend of the Catholic Church. Avoid at all costs.
 The autobiography already mentioned is what can be recommended for the truth.
God bless you.

I wondered about that.  Thank you. It seems one cannot get away from the Thuc calumniators.

Jarvis' biography is the best academic work on Msgr. Thuc. Yes, the author has biases that come through in the text, but an educated adult should be able to navigate biases.

I saw this intro on Amazon (the very first sentence) ... not sure who wrote it.

Sedevacantism, American Catholicism’s only homegrown "new religious movement" (NRM), argues that the Catholic Church has sunk into heresy at the hands of false popes.

That's not even close to true, in general, but even about sedevacantism.  There were early Sedevacantists all over the world, particularly in Mexico, but elsewhere as well.

Not to mention that, no, we do not hold that "the Catholic Church" has sunk into heresy ... that's precisely the point of SVism.

If Jarvis wrote this, then he's discredited in the very first sentence.

https://tuannyriver.com/2018/08/08/ngo-dinh-thuc-anticommunist-and-ambitious-builder/

Ngô Đình Thục: anticommunist and ambitious builder

Paris, April 1967: Archbishop Thục officiating the funeral of his niece Ngô Đình Lệ Thủy, who was killed during an auto accident. On the right are Madame Nhu and her son. ~ pc manhhai on flick

I have been looking into Marian devotionalism in South Vietnam, and one figure that has emerged large is Ngô Đình Thục, the Archbishop of Huế and older brother of Ngô Đình Diệm. It is well known that Thục was intent on building a national Marian center at La Vang, the site of apparitions to persecuted Catholics in the late eighteenth century and the nineteenth century. (In Misalliance, Ed Miller notes this development in passing and mentions that Buddhist leaders were “dismayed” by Thục’s decision.)  Nonetheless, reading about the late prelate’s involvement with La Vang made me see more fully the scope of his desires and designs.
There were, of course, many things about Marian devotion in South Vietnam, and one should be careful not to overplay Thục’s role. That said, it is clear that he occupied a unique position in the Vietnamese Church during the late 1950s and early 1960s. Thục’s training and preparation was as good as any Vietnamese cleric could have received at the time. After minor and major seminaries in Indochina, he underwent further studies in Rome that yielded top honors in four subjects and doctorates in theology and Canon Law. His main sponsor, Bishop Eugène Marie Joseph Allys (called Lý among Vietnamese), had high hopes for the young priest and he did not disappoint. After stints of teaching at Catholic high schools and co-editorship of the first journal for Vietnamese clergy, Thục was appointed by the Vatican to lead one of the southern vicariates. At forty years old and merely twelve and a half years after priestly ordination, he became the third Vietnamese bishop.  The year was 1938, which is another way of saying that Thục independently made his marks long before his younger brother became the first president of the Republic of Vietnam. In fact, as detailed in Miller’s book, Thục’s influence and connections played a crucial role in helping Diệm gain support abroad during the early 1950s.
Turning to a different book, this blog had praised Charles Keith’s monograph on Vietnamese Catholicism for its wealth of information about the associational culture during late colonialism. I wish to praise it again, this time for locating some very interesting information about Thục’s life. Notably, as bishop of the apostolic vicariate (later diocese) of Vĩnh Long, Thục was, in Keith’s words, “one of most important figures in the spread of Catholic youth and worker associations in Cochichina.” He also pushed for greater involvement among the laity and later became one of the biggest supporters of Catholic Action in Vietnam. From all appearances, he was an able builder and, possibly, a solid administrator. Vĩnh Long might have a smaller player in the Catholic landscape during late colonialism and the early independent period. Thục’s performance, however, meant that he was destined for greater roles.
Thục’s ambition, indeed, was to be the leader of the Archdiocese of Saigon, the largest and wealthiest of all dioceses in Vietnam during 1954-1975. This seat also offered the likeliest route to the cardinalate. Given the structure of ecclesiastical hierarchy and the postcolonial context, one could hardly blame Thục for wanting to be the first Vietnamese cardinal. But it was not meant to be for the simple fact that his younger brother was occupying the government seat in Saigon. Diệm himself did not want Thục to be the Archbishop of Saigon, not wishing for further suspicion and accusation of family rule. The Vatican must have agreed, and Thục was assigned to Huế, where he had begun his life and ecclesiastical career.  (In 1976, Pope Paul VI made Trịnh Như Khuê, the Archbishop of Hanoi, the first Vietnamese cardinal. In a twist of sorts, Thục’s own nephew Nguyễn Văn Thuận became the fourth Vietnamese cardinal in 2001.)

Undated photo of Thục among Catholics in South Vietnam.

Now in his sixties, Thục immediately put himself to work in Huế. Among his priorities was the upgrading of the La Vang site, especially because it was scheduled to host the triennial pilgrimage festival only four months after his arrival to the archdiocese. Long story short, the site received a makeover of sorts then welcomed tens of thousands of pilgrims, including most bishops in South Vietnam, for nearly a week of prayer and celebration. Thục presided over the opening and closing masses, and led the dedication of the La Vang shrine, which Pope John XXIII had raised to the status of a minor basilica. It was probably the zenith of public glory for the Vietnamese prelate.
This festival was also a site of anticommunist nationalism: a complex topic deserving its own blog post at some other time. For now, it suffices here to say that the success of the festival gave credence to the proposition that the Archbishop was, as Phi-Vân Nguyen calls him in an article published two years ago, “the country’s leading anti-communist.” I’d offer the qualification that he was South Vietnam’s leading anticommunist Catholic (or, if you prefer, leading Catholic anticommunist). In any event, Thục must have pulled all kinds of strings–including his clout as older brother of the president and “first among equals” of all bishops–to get the site remodeled in record time, then to organize, I think, the largest festival up to that time.
In some respects, Thục was essentially an institutional builder. La Vang was only the most publicized and most ambitious among his projects, but there were more. He led the construction of a minor seminary and the remodeling of Saint Sulpice Seminary of Hue, the archdiocese’s offices, and the archbishop’s residence. In 1962, he unified five or six groups of the Lovers of the Cross–different sources give different numbers–under his jurisdiction into one institute called the Lovers of the Cross of Huế.  (Some members of this group became refugees in the U.S. after the Fall of Saigon. Click here for a recent post of mine about one of them.) They were impressive accomplishments, especially because his tenure in Huế was short: just a little over two years. Then the Second Vatican Council took him to Europe and permanent exile. Had it not been for the dramatic events of 1963, which were facilitated by Thục’s public and triumphant Catholic display of anniversaries, it is reasonable to think that he would have kept building a lot more, literally and figuratively, for the Archdiocese of Huế and the Vietnamese Church.
The problem, of course, is that Thục’s ambition was carried out in the most Buddhist region of Vietnam, which also happened to be the historical center of  Vietnamese Buddhist revival and Buddhist nationalism. He did not seem to demonstrate the kind of sensitivity towards Buddhist leaders that his younger brother Ngô Đình Cẩn, the unofficial governor of the region, had done. He addressed his announcements and speeches about La Vang to Catholics and non-Catholics alike–đồng bào lương giáo–as if thinking that non-Catholic Vietnamese would support the center because it was “national” and overlook the fact that it was “Marian.” What exactly led him into this line of thought should make for some interesting research or speculation.
Counter-factual history usually ends in futility, yet I can’t help wondering how things would turn out had the Vatican appointed Thục to Saigon instead of Huế. 
Click here for my post on the last years of Thục’s life.

Persto: This website is Vietnamese Novus Ordo, but they have some interesting material.

That funeral picture of Arcbishop Thuc is truly inspiring!  Thank you for sharing this!

Here's a partial Autobiography of Archbishop Thuc.
http://www.einsicht-aktuell.de/index.php?svar=2&ausgabe_id=180&artikel_id=1920

It's not complete in the English and stops right before the Palmar incident (would be nice to get the full thing).  +Thuc wrote this after the +des Lauriers, +Carmona, and +Zamora consecrations, and you can see there that he remained very sharp, recalling minute details, including the names of various manual laborers in his early days in Vietnam, etc., minute details of all kinds, from memory.  It kindof reads a bit like St. Therese's "Story of a Soul", showing great humility.  That is the one thing that always truck me about Archbishop Thuc, his great humility.  He was exiled from his See by Montini, relegated to being an assistant priest hearing confessions at various little parishes, living in tiny/cramped/dirty apartments, etc.  And not once did he utter a word of complaint but accepted it all with humility.  In fact, he expressed gratitude to those who allowed him to hold these positions and earn his room and board.  This was an Archbishop, mind you, who had started seminaries, held 3 Doctorates (should have been at least given a position at the Vatican), and had a mandate from Pius XI to perform consecrations without explicit permission from Rome.  Montini gave him the Cardinal Mindszenty treatment because he and his family (brutally martyred by the Communists) were staunchly anti-Communist, and Montini, undoubtedly a Communist agent, would have none of that.

I am excited to read this!  What a blessing that he actually took notes and wrote an autobiography.  I wish that there was one by Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop des Lauriers as well.

Actually, this book cnannot be recommended. It is a work of calumny against Bishop Thuc. The author is an Anglican "priest" of sorts who is not a friend of the Catholic Church. Avoid at all costs.
 The autobiography already mentioned is what can be recommended for the truth.
God bless you.

Thank you for the warning!  

I am usually slow to buy books but this is one of the few times that I went and bought it right away...   

So...  It is biased but still has most of the facts right at least about pre-vatican ii times?

Yes, that’s what he’s saying, that it’s well researched with much factual information … for those who are capable of sifting out the author’s bias.  In the intro on Amazon (not sure who wrote it), you can see a strong bias against sedevacantism.  Also talks about +Thuc working with the CIA to bolster a corrupt government … which is your perspective if you’re not anti-Communist.