What something should or should not be called is, in the end, a matter of opinion. If you wish to label some common ancestor "ape", though, you make a statement that might tend to confuse others into believing you're refering to a modern animal. People then ask why it is apes still exist if people evolved from them. The answer is they didn't. They evolved from a common, ape-like, ancestor.
But if you insist that this ape-like ancestor should be called an ape because of its similarity to modern apes, then you're forced to call humans a kind of ape, too. But this makes the statement that humans evolved from apes silly.
All this can be avoided by simply saying humans and apes evolved from a "common ancestor".
There's actually nothing silly about it. The common ancestor was an ape. There's a list of traits that distinguish apes from monkeys. Apes evolved from monkeys, spread out, and diversified. Humans are still apes, yes. That should be OK. Trying to keep track of the tree of life, what arose from what, is more informative than trying to lose track of same.