If one follows contemporary literature, one can observe a trend to label all journeys with a purpose as “pilgrimages.” Visiting a football stadium (“pilgrimage to Camp Nou in Barcelona”), a musician’s grave, or a place of cultural importance (“heritage pilgrimage”) are all examples of activities which are increasingly being described using this word (Roszak, 2022). In this way, the term “pilgrimage” loses its theological meaning and begins to encompass many phenomena which are related only indirectly (by external similarity) to this reality, thus becoming a blurred, vague concept that escapes precise description (Bailey, 2022).

This is, after all, a key issue in any field of reflection: the correct identification of the object of study. If everything means the same thing, then no characteristics or laws can be established. Not all pilgrimage routes are the same, so it matters which way one goes. However, as Pazos (2023) notes (see also Bremer, 2006), a certain regularity can be observed in this semantic inflation; after an intense period during which the names are extended to all referents, once the point of saturation and the peak of euphoria are reached, the original, narrower meaning then returns. One can observe a similar trend in what is happening around pilgrimage today – a steady movement towards emphasizing how it “differs” from other forms of wandering. The core difference is that pilgrimage is about the hierarchy of what the pilgrim finds interesting. Pilgrimage has always contained an element of curiosity about the world, of learning about culture or food and meeting people, but the key issue remains an orientation towards the main goal – one which cannot be overshadowed by secondary goals. Pilgrimage used to integrate these elements, but it did so according to a certain hierarchy of importance; it was an inclusive experience in its nature, without expecting the pilgrim to abandon everything and focus solely on one aspect of the journey.

The propensity to label every journey as a pilgrimage proves the popularity and positive image of the pilgrimage in the public perception but at the same time threatens to blur its essence. It is therefore necessary to discover and deepen the theology of pilgrimage, which deals with the configuration of journeys to places of worship, in order to see the differentia specifica (as in the classical definition), which is the soteriological orientation of the effort. In other words, pilgrimage is about doing something for the sake of salvation in the sense of a union with God that brings freedom and does not imply exclusivism. In the same way, Christian salvation incorporates the temporal experience of life, showing its meaning from the perspective of the end (telos), which gives significance to the “means” to this end. Therefore, in classical Christian theology, of which St. Thomas Aquinas is a representative, the sacred dimension is relational; it signifies a certain reference rather than a “place.” In other words, it is not so much that the sacred can be seen as it is that everything else can be seen through the sacred. Moreover, the Christian perspective is more about the sanctum, related to the good and love, more interpersonal and directed toward God than about the sacrum, that are glimpses or signs of God's holiness in the world, provoking admiration and wonder (Otto, 1993; Pospieszalski, 1983; Sieradzan, 2006).

By using the philosophical categories proposed by the theory of hylomorphism (the doctrine that physical objects result from the combination of matter and form), it is possible to distinguish a material element and a formal element in every pilgrimage. The former is common to many journeys as it involves fatigue, movement, and visits to places of cultural and religious significance. And yet, it is the formal aspect that gives pilgrimage its identity; in a human being, it is the soul – as the form of the body – that shapes the distinctive arrangement of matter which constitutes that being. Transposing this to the topic of interest, the tourist may resemble the pilgrim externally (in terms of “matter”), but the motivations and the fruits (“form”) are the true distinguishing factors.

The tourist seeks experiences, whereas the pilgrim seeks relationships that will change them in the perspective of becoming one with God. Therefore, the pilgrim “repeats” the journey because the relationship does not bore them, while the tourist “has already been there” and is constantly looking for new things. The tourist ticks places off their list without establishing any deeper relationship with them, effectively “consuming” (and then “excreting”) them. By making a tour, that is, turning around, and by changing their routine over and over again, the tourist explores places as “attractions,” thus discounting the value they hold. For the tourist, roadside shrines are an attraction, not a place of worship, which makes the whole endeavor a “second-hand” experience. The pilgrim, on the other hand, can access reality directly as a participant in it (Barnes, 2013).

Since the tourist’s goal is the “experience” itself rather than what it can build up in the person, it seems legitimate to question the genuineness of that experience or even challenge the authenticity of the places that the tourist visits in order to compare them with others. In the case of the pilgrim, it is the journey that matters, but it does so on account of the destination, not the “experience”; pilgrims are not looking for themselves in these experiences but for an encounter with God. Nevertheless, it should be emphasized that the subjective experience of people of late modernity also includes a religious experience with its transformative power (Martinez, 2023). The pilgrim is therefore looking for meaning, seeing a “sign” of God’s blessing in seemingly contradictory events and asking about the sense of that sign. The tourist wants exactly what they have planned and how they have imagined it; thus, they are unable to open themselves to the unexpected and surprising unless it is associated with control.