I'm not one to look down upon a properly done novus ordo mass by a faithful priest. Those too draw people who are tired to their bones of clown masses and masses all about Father Funny.
We have to realize that following Vatican II the bureaucrats really messed with the liturgy. And we need to walk that back. In my parish we are, going back to a communion rail finally. As we walk things back we need to keep from fragmenting. And your point about Latin Mass communities, Ordinariate communities, and Eastern Rite communities is well taken. Please do not exclude those communities who do a good job even if they use the novus ordo. We exist too, and we should all be cross fertilizing each other rather than fracturing further. Now the crowd that favors clown masses and masses that are all about the priest and hippie masses and all of that, well, people are voting with their feet as they should.
I have reservations about the Latin Mass. It strikes me as somewhat faddish.
I haven't looked at this in any great detail, but one of the strongest and oldest arguments in favor of a departure from a Tridentine-style Mass is the argument in favor of the vernacular. The TLM is really an adapted animal, with vernacular readings being given or at least supplemented, with liturgical roles being adapted based on the availability of deacons and subdeacons, etc.
So you often have English readings in the TLM and you often have Latin responses in the
Novus Ordo--and Catholics tend to understand the Latin for things like the
Sanctus,
Mysterium Fidei,
Agnus Dei, etc. But liturgical theology really comes to bear in things like the Introit, Propers, and Collects, and I think it heavily favors the vernacular. When the congregation can't understand a word of the culminating prayer that is meant to gather (collect) all of the individual prayers into one there occurs a fairly serious infraction against the theology of communal prayer.
Sacrosanctum Concilium didn't give precisely this sort of argument, but it did open the door to the vernacular in a significant way.
The TLM probably has a role, but certainly not as the majority Mass. It is a part of our tradition that should be honored and kept alive, and it can also help guide liturgical practice. Indeed it has had an influence on the Novus Ordo in recent years. It is more common to see priests use incense, substitute the introit for a hymn, celebrate
ad orientem, use altar rails, etc. Of course you can argue whether the Council intended to abrogate any of this, including Latin, but the TLM provides the concrete bridge to older liturgical practice. And I think there are good arguments in favor of all of these things that are being incorporated into the Novus Ordo, but I don't think the arguments in favor of Latin hold up (excepting responses). Even 40 years ago the language was taught in many public high schools, but today it is particularly dead.
(There are some interesting and creative arguments that say unintelligible sounds can aid prayer, much like speaking in tongues. Even if there is something true about this, it isn't nearly enough to carry the day.)
