I think there are two different aspects here; ones theology and actual application. I believe that one can have excellent theology and yet fail to apply that in some areas of there life. It's a problem of inconsistency.
The other problem is defining reformed. I have wondered this myself several times and began a couple of threads to help understand just what it means. As best as I can tell, the loosest definition is "one who holds to the five SOLAS and TULIP. I also believe that those who hold to the amryldian doctrine and deny the L of TULIP have been known as reformed but with some suspicion.
There are so many other differences within the "reformed camp" on eschatology, sacramentology, ecclesiology, the understanding of the covenants, etc., that I dare not add much more to the definition I already gave.
