I dunno. Such issues must be an important matter of consideration, certainly. But I think you have to factor in the fact that any response that could be interpreted in any way -- even misinterpreted -- as "submissive" would only have encouraged extremist Muslims (and conversely discouraged moderates) including encouraging violence, including violence against subject Christians.
Gotta remember that, not as to Muslims as a whole, but as to those Muslims inclined to extremism and violence, you're basically dealing with THUGS here. It's a regrettable, but undeniable, rule of dealing with thugs that ANY expression of weakness, compromise or accommodation does not appease but them but rather encourages them and drives them to yet more extreme levels of violence.
In addition, even IF genuinely moderate Muslims were also offended by aspects of the Pope's remarks, it is still nevertheless, and whether they immediately recognize it or not, an insult to their dignity to be overly obsequious: to walk around them always on little tippy toes because they're just too delicate and sensitive to treat like grownups.
Indeed, I would argue that what the pope and Vatican officials have been saying since Sept. 12th have themselves been quite wimpy and obsequious.
On Sept. 19th I offered a suggestion as to what Pope Benedict could have said on Wednesday, Sept. 13th when the worldwide news first broke and the protests began, but before the riots and violence and mayhem.