I've been hearing a lot of people lately referring to the MTC as a reformed eastern orthodox church.  But if Orthodoxy is "correct belief" and "correct worship", what sense is there in reforming it?  Isn't it self-contradictory?  More importantly, since most Orthodox beliefs and practices have been thrown out of the window in the MTC (veneration of saints and the Virgin Mary, iconography, prayers for the dead, confession, belief in the eucharist as the body and blood of Jesus Christ rather than just a symbol, etc.), why is it that the MTC as an entity still refers to itself as orthodox, even though most of it's members refer to themselves as reformed or protestant?

 I do not ask this question as a statement; I'm not trying to assert that the MTC is wrong or that I know better than everyone else.  I'm genuinely curious as to whether anyone has a cogent answer to this question, because I have not been able to find one myself.
 

It is true that the Mar Thoma Church is a Reformed Eastern Orthodox Church, but the church is neither fully orthodox neither protestant. Personally, I tell my friends who are not from the St. Thomas tradition that the church is a Reformed Oriental Orthodox Church. It is more technical to put it in that terms becuase the Mar Thoma Church reformed from the Oriental Orthodox Communion of Church, and that the Eastern Orthodox church are mostly composed of the Orthodox Churches in Russia and Eastern Europe. The Mar Thoma Church is not fully protestant because the Church never came out of the Roman Catholic Church, and that the term "protestant" should belong to those who "protested" againist the Catholic church (Lutheran etc.). The church is not also fully orthodox. It may be orthodox in tradition, but not in specfic terms. But to answer your question, the reason why many people refer the Mar Thoma Church as a "Reformed Eastern Orthodox Church" is because it probably formed with the other churches out of the Kerala Churches. Some people (espically in America) have no understanding on the term on Reformed Oriental Orthodox. Majority of the population is either Protestant or Catholic w. a minorty of Orthodox, Mar Thoma, CSI etc. Only people within our St. Thomas tradition would knoe more about the stance on the Church. The Mar Thoma Church is in full communion with the Anglican Church, that makes it not orthodox, but it is neither Protestant because of its strong Orthodox roots. Besides that I'm proud to be a Marthomite and my churches heiterage, with a blend of east and west this makes our church different from all the others, but it doesn't matter on what the outer view on the church is, but to proclaim that all christians belive in one Holy, catholic and Apostical Church, and that Jesus is our savior!

Note: Please don't take this view as fact, but is a personal view on the church.

I agree that Reformed 'Oriental Orthodox' is technically a more valid label than Reformed 'Eastern Orthodox"  Some people do not know the difference between the two.  The Oriental Orthodox Churches include the Armenian Orthodox Church, the Coptic (Egyptian) Orthodox Church, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, the Eritrean Orthodox Church, the Indian (Malankara) Orthodox Church, and the Syriac Orthodox Church.  These churches accept the first three ecumenical councils (from Nicea, Constantinople, and Ephesus) as does the Mar Thoma Syrian Church.  The Eastern Orthodox Church accepts the first seven ecumenical councils. 

 I am from the Indian Orthodox Church, so this is my view of the Mar Thoma Syrian Church.  Both churches share the same ties from when St. Thomas reached the Malabar coast and preached the Gospel.  After that there was a connection with the Church of Persia (established by St. Thomas); hence, the Malankara Church had some sort of 'apostolic union' with the Church of Persia.  Moreover, the Orthodox Church and the Mar Thoma Church histories are the same also when the Portuguese subjected the Malankara Church under the Roman Catholic yoke for over 50 years.  The restoration of the Orthodox faith to the people of Malankara was led by the Archdeacon Thomas protesting the Portuguese through the Coonen Cross Oath.  As a result, a bishop from the Patriarchate of Jerusalem of the Syriac Orthodox Church, Mor Gregorios Abdul Jaleel elevated Archdeacon Thomas to a bishop titled 'Mar Thoma I'.  Mor Gregorios brought with him the West Syrian liturgical tradition; the use of this tradition is the foundation of the Orthodox and Mar Thoma Churches.  The histories of both churches diverge at the time when Mathews Mar Athanasius became the Malankara Metropolitan.  Since he was part of the reformation in Malankara (the eventual Mar Thoma Church) propagated by his uncle Abraham Malpan, there were concerns of the validity of his office.  (In reality, Abraham Malpan did not want a separate church, rather a reformed liturgy, but that is a different story).  Therefore both the Malankara Orthodox Church and the Mar Thoma Church share some of the same administrative ties from the Malankara Metropolitans.

 In terms of faith, the Mar Thoma Church is part of the West Syrian liturgical family which includes the Syriac Orthodox Church, the Jacobite Syrian Church, the Syriac Catholic Church, the Maronite Catholic Church, the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church, the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church, and the Malabar Independent Syrian Church of Thozhiyoor).  The Maronite Catholic Church, for example, uses a Latinized version of the West Syrian rite because of its direct communion with the Roman Catholic Church.  This is analogous to the Mar Thoma Syrian Church being an reformed rite of the West Syrian liturgy as a result of her communion with the Anglican Church.   Something interesting to point out is that the Mar Thoma Church is in communion with the Malabar Independent Syrian Church of Thozhiyoor (whose rite is identical to that of the Syriac and Malankara Orthodox Churches).  The MISC was part of the Malankara Orthodox Church but became independent in the late 18th century due to disagreements concerning the authority of some bishops.