Namaste,
It seems i'm not the only one with a taste for long commentaries! HAHAHA I just ordered a copy of Sri Ramanujacharyaji's Sri Bhashya... It was so expensive (probably because any book on our Ubhaya Vedanta philosophy is pretty obscure even to Western Hindus) but i'm psyched to memorize and comment on them myself...
Anyway, to get back to the topic at hand... I'm not a separatist but I think when Westerners start mixing things like various tilaka (that are markings socially tying you to a certain religious group), you start breaking down tradition and step away from the acharyas' teachings. I know of no acharya who teaches one should wear the Sricharanam while at the same time being an orthodox Saivite (not that that's necessarily the case). And i do love evolution of religious cultures--if i didn't i probably wouldn't be enthralled in the teachings of Ramanuja the way i am... However, there's a reason why some of the traditions exist to this day. It is up to us to fish through and decide personally what we want to choose to accept or reject, but one should understand and be able to clarify why they wear that specific tilaka, or practice/adhere to certain doctrines or religious traditions. If i can't wear my entire tilaka for whatever reason i still wear a single bindhu (because at least it signifies i'm tied into the Hindu community at large) which in itself is a mark of devotion to the Supreme Lord Narayana.
I truly believe that Yogananda was an enlightened teacher and he accomplished what Madhuri-ji was explaining in an earlier post. With reference to religion, he did the same thing as Vivekananda---utilized Christianity to teach Hinduism so that it wouldn't be outright rejected. At the same time, philosophically they are somewhat different... Vivekananda seems to have created a Neo-Vedanta more on par with the Advaita of Shankara, while Yogananda's philosophical teachings differed even more than Vivekananda with respect to Shankara's traditional Advaita Vedanta. Yogananda reminds me more of a qualified non-dualist (not exactly like Ramanuja's Vishishtadvaita) solely with regard to de-emphasizing the necessity of determining whether the Nirguna or Saguna aspect was superior...
*Pranams*