I agree with you. What I was trying to point out was the fact that Luther's break with the Church had nothing to do with Protestantism as it exists today. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Luther and Calvin would have no problem with traditional Catholicism (as opposed to what we find all to often in the United States) today. I do not think we should discount all of their points of contention, as many of them were later acknowledged and corrected by the Church.
No, this blithely minimizes other contentions, beside Marian devotion, that Luther and Calvin had. Luther developed the heretical (as well as patently absurd) notion of co-substantiation in lieu of Transsubstantiation and the Real Presence. Calvin simply denied the Real Presence. There was also Zwingli who, ignorantly, taught that because Hebrew makes no use of "to be" as an auxiliary, "this is My body" doesn't mean the same thing in Hebrew (or something along these lines; this must be where Clinton got his meaning of "is" stratagem). Both Luther (defrocked and married, another impossibility for a Catholic) and Calvin had a warped view on the priesthood, although that perhaps is a reflection of the corruption in the Church.
The theme of self-study of the Bible outside of the teaching authority of the Church, and as a substitute for participation in the Sacraments is common throughout Protestantism, and is very un-Catholic.
I would agree, perhaps, that if Luther visited an utterly desacralized evengelical church today, he would run to the nearest confessional, but not Calvin -- he'd be right at home.