Actually, I don't confuse morality with "spirituality" (whatever that is)--but worship of God is essential to morality--according to Christ.
Jesus' 2 Commands (which He said ALL of God's laws "hung on"), above even the 10 Commandments, are, as I stated earlier in this post, love of God, and love of neighbor.
Am I saying Christ indicated that if a person loves his fellow man without loving or worshiping God he is immoral? Correct. And I would add it is impossible to thoroughly love others if you don't love God. There are a lot of nice decent atheists...who treat others well, however, their love of others is incomplete.
Does that make those who claim to love God without loving their fellow man moral? Of course not, one does not exist without the other--but love of God must come first (while still being inseparable from love of man). Love of God, love of man, that is ethics--and also the essential message of the 10 Commandments.
As a Christian, I would also add, that without the grace of God giving a man a new heart, love of God and love of man is as impossible as is perfectly following all the 10 Commandments all the time. That grace is offered through Jesus Christ.
Then I want to propose that EVERY good gift comes from the Father through the Son. And that's true as stated, "irregardless" of the, ahem, belief system (if any) of the recipient of those gifts.
YES, I think that ethical thinking is likely to be more better if one is at least wrestling with the "summary of the law", but I'll go to the mat for the notion that no good thinking of any kind happens without God's being intimately involved, whether His presence and help is asked for, looked for, known, or unknown.
And, treading where I have no bidnis, I'll say that SOME atheists who have committed themselves to following their reason wherever it leads have at least avoided the spiritual trap of treating the big 'T' Truth like it belonged to them or they'd done a corner in the Truth market, and humble themselves and conform themselves to their best take on where their best efforts lead them.
It is hard for me to imagine that The Lord, who said,"I am the ... Truth,..." is not somehow involved gracioulsy in their forming their commitment to the truth.
We, I most especially, have to understand and accept that by our moral failings, our sins, and especially our sins in discourse and in interpersonal relationships, have encouraged many who would love the Truth if they knew Him, to doubt anything we and our co-religionists say. And though, as we believe, Jesus in making His Church "apostolic" has given us a responsibility which we have frequently dodged or betrayed, yet, I think (and will go to the mat for) He continues to seek out those who will unlock the doors and let some glimmer of light in, who will serve the alien truth rather than the domestic desire. And when we, by our actions, have made His name repulsive, I think He in His mercy is content to enter and remain incognito, at least for a while.
Paul, misunderstanding dreadfully, in the name of what he thought was "true religion" persecuted us. But at least he followed where he thought God was leading him. And we know that, since Paul, God has knocked many good men and women off their asses, and by dashing them, unseeing, to the ground has finally perfected all their gifts and fiery commitment and set them in the right direction.
I'll tend to bet, therefore, on an atheist who is ready to die for a truth as best he can understand it over a Catholic who thinks he's tamed God and made Him safe. The atheist may wake up one day and finally know who the Truth was whom he sought and to whom he committed himself. The Catholic may pull himself out of the cold water and, leaving others to drown, start looking for a way to buy God off, and when the skies do not crack and reveal his poltroonery and selfishness he may conclude he succeeded.