This is just a question I am raising based on a reading of older liturgical texts from the early centuries of Christianity (Apostolic Tradition, Hippolytus, Serapion, Didache and Mark) and a reading into historical descriptions of them.
I am wondering why, our Coptic Church has limited its use of liturgies to only 3 (I know which pope did it and why, but why don't we go back), when it used diverse liturgical texts (like that of Serapion). Many churches use wide variety of anaphoras like the Ethiopian and Syriac Churches. It also seems that the earliest liturgies were far less elaborate, straightforward, less ceremonial and shorter. Why did it become increasingly interspersed with rituals and ceremony? I have read many descriptions that many of the liturgical prayers were in fact improvised prayers by the priests. If that was the case, why do we continue to sing the liturgical texts, and insist that this is the way we must do it.
It seems that there was a much larger diversity and fluidity in the liturgy of the early church that no longer exists in our rigid attitude towards it. Perhaps this offered more life and meaning to the faithful. These are just mere thoughts and would like to see what others have to say on this (especially those well educated on this).