I sometimes come across liturgists who are convinced such models are compulsory, along with various incantations and religious repetitions
As I've read Luther over the years, I've found much of the opposite of what you are describing. For instance,
“But that we should institute masses, vigils and prayers to be repeated forever for the dead every year, as if God had not heard us the year before, is the work of Satan and is death itself, where God is mocked by unbelief, and such prayers are nothing but blasphemy of God. Therefore take warning and turn from these practices. God is not moved by these anniversary ceremonies, but by the prayer of the heart, of devotion and of faith; that will help the departed souls if anything will. Vigils, masses, indeed help the bellies of the priests, monks and nuns, but departed souls are not helped by them and God is thus mocked.”[Sermons of Martin Luther 2.2:30.]
On the other hand, there is a place for repetition within a liturgy. Any church with a hymnbook will at some point sing the same song again (though probably not in the same service). To shrink it down even further, an order of worship in a church service is a positive use of repetition. For those of us who attend church, there is a pattern of how a service is laid out, and this is not a bad thing. To shrink it down even further: the very words of language being used in a church service sometimes repeat, like "praise the Lord" and "amen." To add yet another layer, the Bible itself presents repetition, the Hebrew language is filled with it, as well as the the gospels repeating the same events in the life of Jesus.