Karl Josef von Hefele（英语：Karl Josef von Hefele）'s commentary on canon II of Gangra NPNF2-14. The Seven Ecumenical Councils. [2010年10月11日]. （原始内容存档于2016年12月20日）. （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） notes: "We further see that, at the time of the Synod of Gangra, the rule of the Apostolic Synod with regard to blood and things strangled was still in force. With the Greeks, indeed, it continued always in force as their Euchologies（英语：Euchologies） still show. Balsamon（英语：Theodore Balsamon） also, the well-known commentator on the canons of the Middle Ages, in his commentary on the sixty-third Apostolic Canon（英语：Canons of the Apostles）, expressly blames the Latins because they had ceased to observe this command. What the Latin Church, however, thought on this subject about the year 400, is shown by St. Augustine in his work Contra Faustum, where he states that the Apostles had given this command in order to unite the heathens and Jews in the one ark of Noah; but that then, when the barrier between Jewish and heathen converts had fallen, this command concerning things strangled and blood had lost its meaning, and was only observed by few. But still, as late as the eighth century, Pope Gregory the Third (731) forbade the eating of blood or things strangled under threat of a penance of forty days. No one will pretend that the disciplinary enactments of any council, even though it be one of the undisputed Ecumenical Synods, can be of greater and more unchanging force than the decree of that first council, held by the Holy Apostles at Jerusalem, and the fact that its decree has been obsolete for centuries in the West is proof that even ecumenical canons may be of only temporary utility and may be repealed by disuse, like other laws."
Karl Josef von Hefele（英语：Karl Josef von Hefele）'s commentary on canon II of Gangra NPNF2-14. The Seven Ecumenical Councils. [2010年10月11日]. （原始内容存档于2016年12月20日）. （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） notes: "We further see that, at the time of the Synod of Gangra, the rule of the Apostolic Synod with regard to blood and things strangled was still in force. With the Greeks, indeed, it continued always in force as their Euchologies（英语：Euchologies） still show. Balsamon（英语：Theodore Balsamon） also, the well-known commentator on the canons of the Middle Ages, in his commentary on the sixty-third Apostolic Canon（英语：Canons of the Apostles）, expressly blames the Latins because they had ceased to observe this command. What the Latin Church, however, thought on this subject about the year 400, is shown by St. Augustine in his work Contra Faustum, where he states that the Apostles had given this command in order to unite the heathens and Jews in the one ark of Noah; but that then, when the barrier between Jewish and heathen converts had fallen, this command concerning things strangled and blood had lost its meaning, and was only observed by few. But still, as late as the eighth century, Pope Gregory the Third (731) forbade the eating of blood or things strangled under threat of a penance of forty days. No one will pretend that the disciplinary enactments of any council, even though it be one of the undisputed Ecumenical Synods, can be of greater and more unchanging force than the decree of that first council, held by the Holy Apostles at Jerusalem, and the fact that its decree has been obsolete for centuries in the West is proof that even ecumenical canons may be of only temporary utility and may be repealed by disuse, like other laws."
Karl Josef von Hefele（英语：Karl Josef von Hefele）'s commentary on canon II of Gangra NPNF2-14. The Seven Ecumenical Councils. [2010年10月11日]. （原始内容存档于2016年12月20日）. （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） notes: "We further see that, at the time of the Synod of Gangra, the rule of the Apostolic Synod with regard to blood and things strangled was still in force. With the Greeks, indeed, it continued always in force as their Euchologies（英语：Euchologies） still show. Balsamon（英语：Theodore Balsamon） also, the well-known commentator on the canons of the Middle Ages, in his commentary on the sixty-third Apostolic Canon（英语：Canons of the Apostles）, expressly blames the Latins because they had ceased to observe this command. What the Latin Church, however, thought on this subject about the year 400, is shown by St. Augustine in his work Contra Faustum, where he states that the Apostles had given this command in order to unite the heathens and Jews in the one ark of Noah; but that then, when the barrier between Jewish and heathen converts had fallen, this command concerning things strangled and blood had lost its meaning, and was only observed by few. But still, as late as the eighth century, Pope Gregory the Third (731) forbade the eating of blood or things strangled under threat of a penance of forty days. No one will pretend that the disciplinary enactments of any council, even though it be one of the undisputed Ecumenical Synods, can be of greater and more unchanging force than the decree of that first council, held by the Holy Apostles at Jerusalem, and the fact that its decree has been obsolete for centuries in the West is proof that even ecumenical canons may be of only temporary utility and may be repealed by disuse, like other laws."
