According to Alvin Plantinga, Where the Conflict Really Lies (WTCRL) page 77-8, while criticizing what he called "hands-off theology" practiced by theologians such as Rudolph Bultmann, noted the following about Isaac Newton:
...Newton himself (one hopes) accepted the Newtonian picture, but he
didn't accept hands-off theology. He believed that God providentially
guides the world. He also believed that God regularly adjusts the
orbits of the planets; according to his calculations, their orbits
would otherwise spiral off into chaos. More important, however:
according to Newton and classical mechanics, natural laws describe how
the world works when, or provided that the world is a closed
(isolated) system, subject to no outside causal influence.
Naturalism does not go back to Newton's worldview. Naturalism rejects Newton's worldview.
According to Plantinga what needs to be added to the Newtonian picture is "Determinism plus the causal closure of the physical universe". (WTCRL, p 85)
A view that accepts the Laplacean picture, not the Newtonian picture, is the source of naturalism. (WTCRL, pp. 84-90)
With that as a preliminary, let's consider the question:
Taking this history in mind, is it possible to study physics without
forcing upon ourselves the naturalistic worldview?
Yes, it is possible. An example of someone who studied physics without accepting the naturalistic worldview was Isaac Newton.
Plantinga, A. (2011). Where the conflict really lies: Science, religion, and naturalism. OUP USA.