While it's an interesting article, I have to say that to say that, like Scotty, I fall into the 'spiritual' and not 'religious category'. Mind you, I sang in church this morning- professionally of course (I got paid). Does that make me religious? Certainly not. However, it does offer me a front row seat on religion in action.
Few want to admit it, but religion involves a great deal of showmanship. Being spiritual does too. However, the difference is one of formality.
One person quoted in the article makes much of spirituality being egotistical. Well. I've seen lots of egos close up in all the churches I have worked for. Sure. One can yak about submitting one's self to a higher order of being, but when it comes down to it, this usually means following the dictates of another person. After all, even the best teachers have one- especially the ones who intone that they have transcended it.
Does this mean that one should trust no one? No. That would be a very insular way to proceed with anything religious or spiritual. My perspective- which echos Scotty's, is that that one should have skillful means, that is, matching the method with the person.
We don't all wear the same size shoe. And some of us don't even wear shoes at all.
Be the love you seek.