Not a word had been spoken, but the tension was tangible. At the front of a basement room in the Briggs building sat the sub-committee charged with issuing a recommendation on what should be done with the prayer in the auditorium at Cranston High School West.

In front of them, approximately 70 people took their seats, the vast of majority of whom wore a blue sign around their necks that read: “Keep original banner.”

By the end of the meeting last Tuesday, the majority of the sub-committee felt the same way.

In summer of 2010, the Cranston School Department received a letter from the ACLU. They were challenging the constitutionality of the banner, which was first erected in the 1950s. They called for the banner to come down, or suggested rewording that would remove any religious references.

The prayer begins with “Our Heavenly Father” and ends in “Amen.”

The issue was taken up at a School Committee meeting in the fall, when a sub-committee was formed to determine whether or not it was worth fighting the ACLU in court. Time passed, though, and nothing had been reported out.

“The ACLU felt at this point it had been lingering for a long time,” said school solicitor Ron Cascione.

To hold off further action from the ACLU, the sub-committee met Tuesday during February vacation. Cascione was on hand to offer his legal opinion to the committee, made up of West students Eric Borrelli and Taylor Grenga, and School Committee members Stephanie Culhane, Michael Traficante and Frank Lombardi.

Before offering their individual recommendations, the group heard testimony from the public.

Ronald L’Heureux, a resident of North Providence, brought with him a copy of the “New England Primer,” a book used to educate children in the 18th century. Religion is a cornerstone for the publication.

“It was used for 240 years to educate our children. If someone can tell me that is unconstitutional, our founding fathers were unconstitutional,” he said. “We’re sick and tired of being bullied by the ACLU.”

Many speakers touched upon the country’s deep roots in religion. Borrelli was unable to attend the meeting, but his statement was read aloud for the audience.

“Prayer and religion are an important part of American society,” he wrote, ticking off places you find religious references, such as currency, at the beginning of Congressional hearings and in the courtroom. In his opinion, separation of church in state was intended to keep government out of the church, not the other way around. “At Cranston High School West, students do not have to recite the prayer at all if they do not want to.”

Borelli’s classmate, Jessica Ahlquist, disagreed.

“I think this is pretty cut and dry. There are people of all religions and none in school. A public school should not endorse a specific religion,” she said.

Ahlquist was joined by West sophomore Alison Barnett, who cited the “lemon test,” which details the requirements for legislation regarding religion.

The lemon test states that the action must have a secular purpose, it must not advance or inhibit religion and it must not result in an “excessive government entanglement” with religion.

“I don’t think the school prayer has any secular purpose. It seems to me that the school prayer does seem to really only affect the Christian religion,” she said. “Religion getting involved in the public school is being entangled.”

One particularly animated speaker was Chris Young, former mayoral candidate in Providence, who was removed by police from the Cranston School Committee’s initial meeting on the school prayer.

“The people of the City of Cranston do not want you to remove this banner. They will vote against members of this School Committee and this sub-committee if they allow this banner to be removed,” he said.

Young’s fear is that taking down or modifying the prayer is a de facto endorsement of atheism. He submitted a copy of a Facebook page that showed students making comments insulting Christianity. Young likened the ACLU’s suggestion to burning a cross.

“By you denying the right for people to pray, you’re endorsing the atheistic religion,” he said.

On several occasions, speakers expressed concerns of atheism, or the absence of belief in a higher deity, being pushed onto students. West student Taylor Grenga took a middle of the road approach.

“There seems to be a lot of fear here about promoting the atheist religion. Removing the prayer wouldn’t be saying there is no God,” she said.

Rather, Grenga agreed that a rewording could keep the moral intent without endorsing a specific set of beliefs. Another alternative she offered would be to put up prayers from many different religions.

“Either promote all of them or none of them,” she said.

Kara Russo, Young’s fiancée who ran for Lieutenant Governor last fall, brought a copy of the prayer in Arabic – the Muslim language – as an example of compromise. Rewording the prayer, however, was not an option in her opinion.

“They are aggressively attacking God. They want God removed from our society,” she said of prayer opponents.

Realizing the committee had financial considerations to make, she said that the members “can’t have it both ways,” when balancing their religious beliefs and their obligations as elected officials.

The financial realities were on the table last week, as Cascione warned that taking on this kind of legal battle could cost $500,000, $1 million, or more. Given that the district could be facing a more than $3.5 million deficit if they are level funded, that blow could mean further cuts in programs.

The two agencies that were suggested by prayer supporters, the Rutherford Institute and the ACLJ (American Center for Law & Justice), would not pay ACLU’s legal fees if Cranston schools lost.

The Rutherford Institute serves as a support resource in cases such as this, but does not provide direct legal counsel. They support the work of local pro-bono attorneys should they agree to take the case.

The ACLJ represents cases directly, but refused to take on this issue.

“They don’t feel it’s a winnable case,” Cascione said.

Some audience members suggested starting up a collection to pay for the fight.

“The only way the City of Cranston can lose is if they don’t fight this,” said Richard Santaniello of Johnston. “Cranston will look totally poor in the eyes of God.”

Dan Ciora of Warwick said he believes the case would be an easy win for the ACLU, resulting in further debt for Cranston schools.

“No one wants to deny anyone their freedom of religion. That said, the U.S. Constitution is clear,” he said. “Ultimately, the ACLU is going to win. We are a country of laws; we need to follow the law.”

After row upon row of speakers took their turn on the floor, the sub-committee’s elected officials weighed in.

Lombardi, a practicing Catholic, said he struggled to balance his faith with his roles as a lawyer and as an elected official. Ultimately, he sided with the majority of the audience.

“In my opinion as a lawyer, this school prayer as it exists does not violate the lemon test,” he said. “The kids are not being forced to read that prayer. If we read it, God’s not in it. It’s not a Catholic message. It’s telling people to be good.”

Traficante echoed those sentiments. When he was a wrestling and football coach in Cranston, he led his teams in prayer before games. He sees no harm in keeping the prayer as it is.

“I’m a person of faith, and that’s why I’m voting to keep the banner,” he said.

Culhane, also a person of faith, took a different stance. The financial component weighed heavily on her decision, though she admitted she was unsure of how she would vote when push came to shove.

“I have to consider the fact that we may lose this case. If we don’t win, we will owe the ACLU money,” she said.

The sub-committee will issue their majority and minority opinions to the full School Committee, which will likely make a decision at a public hearing that has been scheduled for Monday, March 7 at 6:30 p.m. at Western Hills Middle School.