Spirituality and health research has not reached its full potential because of conceptual, methodological, ideological, and disciplinary concerns that have minimized its integration into the academy. First, major conceptual issues plaguing research has included vagueness and lack of consensus concerning research definitions (e.g., “religion,” “spirituality,” and “health”) and simplistic hypothetical models depicting the relationship of spirituality/religion and positive health outcomes. In addition, a lack of methodological rigor within the field has led to what are often contested study designs, poorly conceived survey methods, and statistical analyses failing to account for confounding factors. This has decreased confidence within the scientific community of the quality of evidence advanced thus far by research in the field. Third, research in spirituality and health has been fraught with ideological tensions associated with controversies surrounding religion in Western societies. For example, while some remain deeply skeptical that religion is being advanced under the guise of science, others are concerned that religion is being co-opted by a scientific hegemony. These differences create obstacles to the pursuit of knowledge and application of best practices to public health policy, care at the bedside, and religious community self-understanding. The study of religion/spirituality and health is fraught with major ethical and practical concerns that have not yet garnered significant scholarly reflection and writing. We are optimistic that if the silos are broken, major discoveries for human flourishing await.