This has to a rhetorical question, right? IS there any question?Not in my mind. There is no comparison.
In a word: Yes.The reasons, John are many, but I will highlight a few.1. It is not fabricated. It was not created by a panel of men in a rushed period of time to accommodate a group of others. The TLM developed over a number of centuries being codified in 1570, but continuing to develop over the next 499 years without a break in continuity.2. It is not banal. The TLM is not cliche. It is timeless and can apply to any time in Christian history as easily as it does today. The same cannot be said of the Novus Ordo. The Novus Ordo is held captive by the time in which it exists.3. It's movements and actions are defined and pronounced not only legally (liturgical law), but also with precision. There is a purpose for every movement and every movement has a purpose.4. It is diversity personified. At any time, one can assist at a TLM and know exactly what is going on, whether it be in his home parish, in Rome or in China. With the exception of the homily, the TLM is absolutely understandable, not only in language, but also in action. It is the epitome of participatio actuosa.Finally, I will say this...the TLM is not bound by man, but rather man is bound by the TLM. The same cannot be said of the Novus Ordo. Man (the Consilium) created the Novus Ordo for a very clear reason, REFORM. The TLM was not created by any one person. It was organically developed by the whole of the Church from the beginning, codified in the 16th century and continued to be developed for another 500. Some say that the Church needed a change. Some would be wrong.