Are there some people who think that Arbp Thuc was not legally ordained? I understand he was the brother of Diem.

I know there is some controversy but cannot remember what it is.

Many people question the ordinations and consecrations that Thuc performed.  I have never heard of anyone questioning whether he was a validly ordained priest or bishop.

There has never been any doubt as to the validity or liceity of the ordination and consecration of Mgr. Ngo.

I believe you refer to the suspect ordination and consecration of Lefebvre both done by the freemason Lienart.

It seems that most people who claim to doubt the validity of Archbishop Thuc's episcopal consecrations do so in order to deprive sedevacantists with any bishops since many, if not most, sedevacantist bishops are of that line.  The reason they usually give for declaring the consecrations to be invalid is that the Archbishop was mentally insane.  Though I have read numerous testimonies that Archbishop Thuc was clearly of sound mind until, at least, very near his death, the "proof" of mental instability is simply the fact that he consecrated bishops.

I have never heard anyone defend the position that the Thuc line bishop are invalid with any charity or facts.  They spew vemonous drivel and opinion and often say that the line is invalid simply because "we know" its invalid.

Probably the most comprehensive defense of the validity of episcopal consecrations of Archbishop Ngo Dinh Thuc can be found in a book entitled, The Answers by Father Kevin Vaillancourt.  The book is available from OLG Press, 3914 N. Lidgerwood St., Spokane, WA  99207.  The OLG Press website is:  http://www.olgpress.com/.

I do not debate this issue with people because I have never found anyone who argues facts; they restate rumors and inuendo.  

I am by no means questioning the character of Abp Thuc. On What grounds do some allege that Thuc was illegitimate? Was he consecrated Bp or Abp by lefevbre?

No one that I have ever heard claims that Archbishop Thuc was an illegitimate bishop, only that the bishops he consecrated are illegitimate.

Principal Consecrator:
Archbishop Antonin-Fernand Drapier, O.P. †
Principal Co-Consecrators:
Bishop Isidore-Marie-Joseph Dumortier, M.E.P. †
Bishop Dominique Ho Ngoc Cân †

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

ABL's ordination and consecration were both done in a perfectly valid form. For one thing, there were two people assisiting Leinart who were NOT Freemasons, and ABL did not know Leinart was one.

Not at his ordination. It was only Liénart who ordained Lefebvre.

The consecration does not "fix" the issue.

Look, it doesn't take away the validity of his ordination or consecration. Without Archbishop LeFebvre, you would not have a Traditional Latin Mass to attend.

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

ABL's ordination and consecration were both done in a perfectly valid form. For one thing, there were two people assisiting Leinart who were NOT Freemasons, and ABL did not know Leinart was one.

Not at his ordination. It was only Liénart who ordained Lefebvre.

The consecration does not "fix" the issue.

My understanding is that it would actually fix this. The rule and philosophy of the church is that that the minor orders are included in the greater. IE when Our Lord made the apostles bishops, he did not make them priests first, then go on to make them bishops afterwards. When he said "do this in memory of me" they became bishops. Also, it is my understanding that ordinarily it is that the tradition of the church to make a person priest, then bishop, but when the consecration of a bishop takes place, the minors are included in the majors. But perhaps commentary from someone who would know this in more detail would solidify this (Caminus, Gladius, Hobble etc...)

Lastly, yes, being a Freemason would have made Liénart not Catholic, but not invalid. In the same way the Orthodox are outside the church, but have valid orders, Liénart was outside the church, but his validity remained. Lastly, some would say his intent was not there, however in the tradition of the church, one is to be considered valid until proven otherwise- and no one can prove or disprove Liénart's intent.

From what I know there is no reason to doubt Thuc's consecration nor the consecrations that he performed.  Really I think the only reason people try to spread doubt is because those individuals want Trad Cath's to go to THEIR church.  I really don't believe it has anything to do with actual doubt of the mental capacity of Archbishop Thuc.