This is revisionist history. Luther split from Rome simply because Rome asked him to come and pay them a visit. Luther recalled what happened to Huss when he dutifully complied and went into hiding. He might have been canonized 300 years after they burned him at the stake but I seriously doubt it. Reformed happened in the Catholic Church simply because Luther and a good many people left. But by then it was too late.
Hardly. If what you say is true, Luther would have been tossed in jail upon visiting Rome. Luther's problem was his pride - he thought his judgment was superior to 1500 years of Church Fathers and teachings, much like you. Luther sealed his OWN fate by saying that Church Councils were NOT infallible. Eck was correct to treat him as a "taxcollector and a heathen" for such comments. Even OTHER PROTESTANTS thought little of Luther's mannerisms and condescending attitude towards others of good will. And if God doesn't even guard Councils, why on earth do you or anyone else believe that the Bible is the Word of God? Based on the Church's non-existent authority? Your house, then, is built on sand, rather than rock.
The contradictions are amazing here.
Regards
Not initially. He remained an obedient son of the Church until Cardinal Cajetan blew him off. His explanations of his 95 Theses were dedicated to Pope Leo X.
Luther's initial intent was to, quite literally, reform the church without schism. Unfortunately, the Catholic church heirarchy wasn't willing to listen. Jo Kus is right - schism is an extreme remedy - one of last resort.