provide compensation for their chaplains. Jd.
Another factor that weighed into the Court's analysis was the fact that the prayer opportunity had not been "exploited to proselytize or advance any one, or to disparage any other, faith or belief."  Jd., at 794-5; 103 S.Ct. at 3338.
In this historical context, Justice Burger concluded that the draftsmen of the First Amendment "saw no real threat to the Establishment Clause arising from a practice of prayer similar to that now challenged."  Jd., at 791; 103 S.Ct. 3335. Justice Burger then concluded:
In light of the unambiguous and unbroken history of more than 200 years, there can be no doubt that the practice of opening legislative sessions with prayer has become part of the fabric of our society.  To invoke Divine guidance on a public body entrusted with making the laws is not, in these circumstances, and "establishment" of religion or a step toward establishment; it is simply a tolerable acknowledgment of beliefs widely held among the people of this country.
Marsh, at 792, 103 S.Ct. at 3335.
Applying this historical analysis to the instant case leads one to the only conclusion possible: that saying a prayer at the presidential inauguration is Constitutional.  Most Presidents have included a prayer in their inaugural festivities, starting with George Washington. See Kevin T. Baine, Education Litigation:  Prospects for Change, 35 Cath. Law. 283, 285 (1994). Justice Scalia, in his dissent in Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577, 632, 112 S.Ct. 2649, 2679-80, (1992)(holding that prayer at public graduation ceremonies violates the Establishment Clause) observed that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James
12