"Abolishing" a practice is NOT "clarification".
The Council of Trent sticks in the craw of Protestants because it organized the counter reformation
Actually I love the Council of Trent (1545AD) because it illustrates just how corrupt the doctrine of the Church became 1000 years later when compared against the Council of Orange (523AD). Consider these contradictory views:
Compare with Orange CANON 5 - If anyone says that not only the increase of faith but also its beginning and the very desire for faith, by which we believe in Him who justifies the ungodly ... belongs to us by nature and not by a gift of grace, that is, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit amending our will and turning it from unbelief to faith and from godlessness to godliness, it is proof that he is opposed to the teaching of the Apostles, for blessed Paul says, "And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 1:6). And again, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God" (Eph. 2:8)....]
---------------------
Council of Trent-CANON V.- If anyone shall affirm, that since the fall of Adam, man’s freewill is lost and extinguished; or, that it is a thing titular, yea a name, without a thing, and a fiction introduced by Satan into the Church; let such an one be accursed"!
Compare with Orange-CANON 8 > If anyone maintains that some are able to come to the grace of baptism by mercy but others through free will, which has manifestly been corrupted in all those who have been born after the transgression of the first man, it is proof that he has no place in the true faith. For he denies that the free will of all men has been weakened through the sin of the first man, or at least holds that it has been affected in such a way that they have still the ability to seek the mystery of eternal salvation by themselves without the revelation of God. The Lord himself shows how contradictory this is by declaring that no one is able to come to him "unless the Father who sent me draws him" (John 6:44), as he also says to Peter, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 16:17), and as the Apostle says, "No one can say 'Jesus is Lord' except by the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor. 12:3).
-----------
Council of Trent - CANON XI.-If any one saith, that men are justified, either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema.
Council of Orange: CANON 13. Concerning the restoration of free will. The freedom of will that was destroyed in the first man can be restored only by the grace of baptism, for what is lost can be returned only by the one who was able to give it. Hence the Truth itself declares: "So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed" (John 8:36).
Please note that I've posted the Council of Orange doctrine from a Reformed site. This is because I can't find the Council of Orange's declarations on New Advent, the Catholic website. Instead they just "tell" you (wrongly) about the Council of Orange. Perhaps I'm wrong but try as I might I cannot find the Council of Orange's doctrine of faith on New Advent. One has to wonder what they don't want people to read.
Contrasting the Council of Orange to the much later Council of Trent shows how the Catholic belief was alter from the true Christian faith.
BTW-The Council of Orange backed all their statements up with scriptural quotes.
As far as Wycliffe's statement on the foolishness of indulgences and Luther's assertion that they are pious fraud, it isn't important what the Church's response is. Wycliffe and Luther are correct.
I seriously doubt it. There were 25 session each issuing a Encyclical report. At the most you have read less than 1% of these and of that I doubt you comprehended much without the context of the whole (kind of like your knowledge of Scripture and the Catechism of the Church). Its clarifications made anuses and corruption more visible and less possible. Its exact wording is important since the Protestant characterization of them is frankly dishonest:
, It ordains generally by this decree, that all evil gains for the obtaining thereof,--whence a most prolific cause of abuses amongst the Christian people has been derived,--be wholly abolished. But as regards the other abuses which have proceeded from superstition, ignorance, irreverence, or from what soever other source, since, by reason of the manifold corruptions in the places and provinces where the said abuses are committed, they cannot conveniently be specially prohibited; It commands all bishops, diligently to collect, each in his own church, all abuses of this nature, and to report them in the first provincial Synod; that, after having been reviewed by the opinions of the other bishops also, they may forthwith be referred to the Sovereign Roman Pontiff, by whose authority and prudence that which may be expedient for the universal Church will be ordained; that this the gift of holy Indulgences may be dispensed to all the faithful, piously, holily, and incorruptly.
The Second Council of Orange, that Calvinists often point to as validation of their heresy, is not even included among the 20 recognized Ecumenical Councils and is not therefore official Church doctrine or dogma. (That explains why you didn't find it.) Its findings were never recognized by the entire Church and have never been considered infallible or a product of the Magisterium.