I respect your perspective and agree with what you say, but I see broader implications from that definition of religion. As a philosopher of religion, I stress the importance of distinguishing spirituality from religion because it parallels with similar distinctions in philosophy and politics. The distinction is not really about clergy or rituals, but that which leads to clergy and rituals. That would be that human impulse to "tie together" or band together that is meant by "re-ligio." Religion is an institution with structure, doctrine, and tradition that creates a community. Does one need an institution to be saved or otherwise be right with the divine? That, as you know, has been a contentious debate in Christianity for centuries. In other faith traditions, too. To my mind, religion and spirituality is a spectrum of belief from the belief that institutions are absolutely necessary to the belief that one must be entirely on one's own. Fundamentalism is the extreme belief in the necessity of institutions, and the opposite extreme would be a totally self-centered spiritual quest. The Hussites and the Society of Friends are examples of communities that inhabit the middle ground on that spectrum. Each individual does best to find a healthy balancing point between institutions and individualism that works for them.