There is a long tradition of this sort of thing in the Anglican Church. For many years there has been a strange phenomenon called ‘Anglo-Catholicism’. This is a practice where Anglican priests practice what seems to be the Catholic faith while continuing to be Anglicans.
In fact, this seems to be the peculiar genius of the Anglican denomination, because on examination you also find Anglicans who are very zealous Presbyterians, others who are committed Pentecostalists, and I have even known some Anglican priests who refused to baptize infants–insisting on ‘believer’s baptism’. This would make them Anglo-Baptists I suppose.
Then there are the mainstream Liberal Anglicans who follow a religion that does not demand belief in anything at all. For them God–If he is there–is a sort of amorphous force in the universe. They are fond of the via negativa way of prayer–in which prayer is a kind of entry into nothingness. They follow a benign ethic of doing no harm and float about in a state of manufactured calm. Hey presto! The Anglo-Buddhist.
So we have Anglo-Muslims, Anglo-Hindus, Anglo-Buddhists, Anglo-Catholics, Anglo-Presbyterians, Anglo-Pentecostalists, Anglo-Baptists and we mustn’t forget the Anglo-homosexualists, Anglo-feminists and Anglo-Marxists. Did I leave anything out?
When I was an Anglican I just wanted to be an Anglican Christian. I wanted the historic Christian faith. I was looking for C.S.Lewis’ Mere Christianity. I soon discovered that practically all my fellow clergy had bolted something else on to Anglicanism. The more I searhed, the more I disovered (initially to my dismay) that the historic Christian faith was fully intact where it had always been, and that was in only one place: Rome Sweet Home.