I hope you won't take offense at this, but some of the best Catholic posters don't do a very good job of refuting some of this stuff. It seems to boil down to semantics, and that's not usually very convincing stuff. Not to mention that Catholics seem unduly defensive, when they don't need to be.
The Faith is not so simple to explain, at least not to my way of thinking, and it would help for admission of past wrongs to be a little more than the perfunctory and standard 'we're only human.'
Isn't there some evidence that Pope Benedict sees Luther in a positive light? Perhaps Luther shouldn't have taken the course he took, but maybe he didn't think he had a choice. And maybe, Luther caused the Church to take a good, long look at Herself and begin to live again as She was intended to. We could have used men made of such stern stuff as regards all of our recent woes. The lessons of history if not learned are destined to be repeated for individual, State and Church alike.
I am not sure who or what you are referring to. Some of it is semantics. When someone quotes a text which uses a word in a well-defined sense and then uses it in a different sense and tell me "Aha!" then it becomes semantics. But see my previous post, -- I list some typical distinctions that Catholicism makes and Protestantism ignores. Are they semantics? I think they are subtle, but they are substantive.