[Sidenote: Row's Opinion.] "When the congregation is assembled," run its tolerant rubrics, "the minister useth one of these two confessions, or _like in effect_."[165] "This done, the people sing a psalme altogether in a plain tune, which ended, the minister prayeth for the assistance of God's Holie Spirit _as the same shall move his heart_, and so proceedeth to the sermon. The minister, after the sermon, useth this prayer following, or _such like_."[166] "Then the people sing a psalme, which ended, the minister pronounceth one of these blessings, and so the congregation departeth."[167] Such are its few and simple directions for the ordinary form of public worship; and as if even these might fail to beget in the minds of some of the old priests a sense of their freedom from minute restrictions and a burdensome ritual, it is added: "It shall not be necessarie for the minister daylie to repeat all these things before mentioned; but, beginning with _some maner of confession_, to proceede to the sermon, which ended, he either useth the prayer for all estates before mentioned, or else _prayeth as the Spirit of God shall move his heart_, framing the same according to the time and matter which he hath entreated of."[168] To the same effect, in the First Book of Discipline, after recommending that in all the large towns there should every day be either sermon or common prayers with reading of Scriptures, it is said: "What day[169] the publick sermon is, we can neither require _nor greatly approve_ that the common prayers be publickly used, lest that we should either foster the people in superstition, who come to the prayers as they come to the masse; or else give them occasion, that they think them no prayers which be made before and after sermons."[170] Even in the most solemn of its special services and in the most solemn part of it, the prayer of thanksgiving and consecration in the communion, the rubric is: "The minister ... giveth thanks either in these words following _or like in effect_."[171] The same thing is confirmed by many of the rubrics of the other occasional services in the Book of Common Order,[172] and by the express testimony of Calderwood, Row, and others who officiated as ministers of the church while the book was in use. The first named of these, though entertaining so strong a regard for its venerable forms that even on the approval of the Westminster Directory in 1645 he is said to have opposed the adoption of any Act expressly abrogating the Book of Common Order, had not hesitated when contrasting it with the English Liturgy thus to speak of the nature and extent of the submission expected to be given to it: "Habemus quidem nos etiam in Ecclesiâ nostra Agendas, et ordinem in sacris celebrandis servandum, _sed nemo alligatur precibus aut exhortationibus liturgiae nostrae_, proponuntur tantum ut peradigmata, quibus precum aut exhortationum materia et forma quoad substantialia indicantur, non ut eisdem verbis