The TLM was also issued under the authority of a pope and an ecumenical council (St. Pius V and Trent) and these are just as valid and Paul VI and Vatican II.  I don't subscribe to the notion that new is necessarily better and the TLM didn't lose any of its efficacy/validity because the NO was promulgated...as Benedict XVI points out the TLM was never abrogated. It's also offensive you compare the TLM where Our Lord becomes present in His Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity in the Holy Eucharist to a Baptist service where no such transubstantiation occurs.

Also, considering the dismal rate of Sunday Mass attendance, how can one claim the goal of full, conscious, and active participation in the liturgy had been achieved? At least when TLM was the norm the churches were packed.