In response to your question, I ask the following:
Is it better to hold the service the night before and get 50 people to come to communion or hold it the next morning and get 5 people to come to communion?
Depends on your beliefs concerning the Liturgy. I am not sure that a Liturgy performed outside of the appointed times is, indeed, a Liturgy. If that is so, what difference does it make how many people attend.
The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.
It matters to them.
Not ot forsaking the assembling of ourselves together as the manner of some is but exhorting one another and so much the more as ye see the day approaching. Heb. 10:25.
You sound like a good Lutheran.
But a better Orthodox.
To heck with Church Order and Tradition.
Take it up with my boss. But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless. Mat. 12:7. (actually, the rest of the chapter is on point).
But, thankfully, we have diversity in this country. Those that wish to be traditional have parishes they can attend, and those who could care less about Tradition have theirs. May it always be so.
We just have our different Traditions. The Russians in particular have the Vigil service as their height of piety, and we Arabs have our Churches blown up, the congregants shot at, the priests stoned (usually not to death-they usually do that by stabbing-but throwing rocks at priests and Churches is a common pasttime of Muslim teenagers and even children. At both EO and OO: the Muslims are quite ecumenical on that). I haven't been so privleged. The closest I came was being on a taxi in the backwoods where Chrisitans being hacked to death is common enough, stuck with a Muslim brotherhood type, ranting on how all Christians are infidels, rather upset that I admitted to be a Christian and that Christ is God. Another Muslim (with whom I had just been arguing how Christ was God's Son), btw, inserted himself between me and the Islamist. May God grant him his reward Mat. 10:42.
So we just show our piety in different ways. The Russians fuss about the difference between half and quarter notes, and we Arabs risk a bullet in the head or a knife in the abdomen for wearing a Cross. In this sign conquer.
While growing up in the States, I was taught to keep my Cross inside my shirt, as it was not jewelry nor decoration. When I went back to live a while in Egypt, my fellows were rather upset with me. Why, they asked, did I wear my Cross inside my shirt? Was I afraid of the Muslims? Was I ashamed of the Church? I explained why, and they were satisfied, but as the Russians say "Don't go to your new monastery with your old rule," so I started wearing it outside, while I was Egypt. In this sign conquer.
Not that wearing it outside meant much much longer: I always liked the Coptic custom of a Cross tattoo and got one, like many, many of those of the younger generation, more and more. The custom had almost died out, but was undergoing a "resurrection" of this discarded tradition, outgrown by many of my parents generation. A friend of mine at the time, Sabry, explained how the Muslims in Egypt were either foreigners or weak. "If they came from Arabia, they are in my country. But that is Ok, as we are to live peaceably with all men. If their grandfathers were Christian but apostized, they belong here, but they are weak." Then he pointed to the large Cross on his wrist and said "I have this because my father was strong, my grandfather was strong, my ancestors were strong going back to the beginning of the Church. They were willing to die for this. I am willing to die for this." Not an idle thought in Egypt in the least. Murdered Christians are hardly news there. I'm afraid he was worthy of the crown. In this sign conquer.
But to each his own.