"I have always warned the faithful vis-à -vis the sedevacantists, for example. There, also, people say: “The Mass is fine, so we go to it.” Yes, there is the Mass. That’s fine, but there is also the sermon; there is the atmosphere, the conversations, contacts before and after, which make you little by little, change your ideas. It is therefore a danger and that’s why in general, I think it constitutes part of a whole. One does not merely go to Mass, one frequents a milieu.” Archbishop Lefebvre, Fideliter No. 79, January/February 1991

Here is that part of the interview per the drbo website:

* Last Interview with Archbishop Lefebvre (drbo.org)

Fideliter
Some of the faithful are tempted to keep good relations with those who have rallied, or even attend the Mass or ceremonies that they celebrate, do you think that there is a danger in that?

There are obviously some people who are attracted by the beautiful ceremonies, who also go to Fontgombault, where they have taken up the old mass again. They are in a climate of ambiguity which to my mind is dangerous. Once one finds oneself in this atmosphere, submitted to the Vatican, subject ultimately to the Council, one ends up by becoming ecuмenical.


When one looks at the previous questions in the interview and the rest of ABL's answer to the immediate question, it is clear that ABL is talking about the mass of FSSP/the indults, NOT the mass of the sedevacantists. 

In fact, the "vis-a-vis" in Stubborn's quote is NOT in the link.  In fact, with the original punctuation and without that phrase, ABL includes the sedevacantists as part of the "faithful".

He didn't "condemn" anything.  Can you read English?  He said he warned against attending SV chapels, for unspecified reasons.  He said in other quotes at the time that he had adopted a benefit-of-the-doubt stance, where he acted as if they were popes ... unless he couldn't do so.

Nope.

He clearly says "“I have always warned the faithful vis-à -vis the sedevacantists."
(vis-à -vis is defined as: in relation to; with regard to.)

How is it that you are able to say that he didn't condemn anything? Because there's more to sedeism than a vacant chair?

Stubborn, I'm still waiting for you to address this quote:
Agree or disagree?  Was +Lefebvre right or wrong?

He was wrong.

But to claim repeatedly that he considered sedeism to be in some way valid, is a lie. Especially in light of the interview only a month or two before he died where he warned against it.

When one looks at the previous questions in the interview and the rest of ABL's answer to the immediate question, it is clear that ABL is talking about the mass of FSSP/the indults, NOT the mass of the sedevacantists. 

In fact, the "vis-a-vis" in Stubborn's quote is NOT in the link.  In fact, with the original punctuation and without that phrase, ABL includes the sedevacantists as part of the "faithful".

This is the snip from the original, which translates as I posted:

Monseigneur – J’ai toujours mis en garde les fidèles par exemple vis-à-vis des sédévacantistes. Ils disent aussi : la messe est bien, nous y allons.

Oui, il y a la messe. Elle est bien, mais il y a aussi le sermon ; il y a l’ambiance, les conversations, les contacts avant et après, qui font que tout doucement on change d’idées. C’est donc un danger et c’est pourquoi d’une manière générale j’estime que cela fait un tout. On ne va pas seulement à la messe, on fréquente un milieu.

This is the snip from the original, which translates as I posted:

Monseigneur – J’ai toujours mis en garde les fidèles par exemple vis-à-vis des sédévacantistes. Ils disent aussi : la messe est bien, nous y allons.

Oui, il y a la messe. Elle est bien, mais il y a aussi le sermon ; il y a l’ambiance, les conversations, les contacts avant et après, qui font que tout doucement on change d’idées. C’est donc un danger et c’est pourquoi d’une manière générale j’estime que cela fait un tout. On ne va pas seulement à la messe, on fréquente un milieu.

And yet right after that he says this:

Obviously, there are people who are attracted by the beautiful ceremonies who also go to Fontgombault, where the old mass has been revived. They find themselves in a climate of ambiguity that I think is dangerous. As soon as one finds oneself in this atmosphere, subject to the Vatican, ultimately subject to the Council, one ends up becoming ecuмenist.

Proving what exactly vis-a-vis the sedevacantists?

I'm questioning the translation because it seems his main point is not about the sedevacantists, but about those who have the Mass, but are connected with Rome.  That is what most of the interview is about.

So, what alternative meaning do you propose for the first sentence besides warning the faithful about attending sedevacantist Masses?

I don't know.  Maybe I'm wrong.  It just seems out of place given the gist of the whole interview.  It's the only time sedevacantists are mentioned.  Something is off to me.