The Spirituality of the Non-Believer

I defaulted in the most cliche manner when trying to obtain the meaning of the word "spirituality" - I looked to the dictionary.  Like an obnoxious speechwriter, I appear to be beginning this post with a dictionary definition.

"The vital principle or animating force within living things."

Vague.  Not at all religious, not really, though of course there are other, more specifically religious, definitions.

There are those who say, when asked about their religious orientation, "I'm not religious, I'm spiritual."

One says this as if it will automatically, and in the most contradictory manner, explain ones deepest nature while at the same time cloaking one within the most bright mysteriousness.

In my view it is a meaningless statement.  It is an attempt, it seems, to keep the spectre of dogmatism at bay.

To be a follower of Christ, or Buddha, or Mohammad, no matter how ethereally so, is to be dogmatic even if only at the very smallest.  Tenets, precepts, codes, rites, rituals - these are all the very lifeblood of any religious order, whether thousands of years old or relatively new.  It may be possible to be spiritual, which I would assume means "concerned with the vital principle", but once a formal deity is brought into the equation, even only in the least obtrusive manner, there is the element of the religious.

Of course, when people ask me about my religious orientation the question is generally more straightforward, with less room for theological wiggle:

"Are you a Christian?"