Peters actions were the CAUSE of that council, James was the leader in that council
AS the 1st church met in Jerusalem it was presided over by James not Peter.
It is clear here that James was in charge of that council and that it was James that made the final ruling.
Peter was the problem not the solution
Please READ the words of James
Act 15:13 And after they had held their peace,James answered, saying, Men [and] brethren, hearken unto me:
Not to Peter, listen" to ME"
Act 15:14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
Act 15:15 And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
Act 15:16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
Act 15:17 That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
Act 15:18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.
Act 15:19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
That is James making the decision NOT PETER's
Can the Pope be OVERRULED in matters of faith? That should be your first clue that he was not in charge and that he was not infallible . For he was in error on this serious matter and was taken to task by Paul
Peter never claimed headship for himself. He was a humble man that would rebuke what is said of him today
Peter was the apostle to the Jews ..not the Roman gentiles
"The gospel of the CIRCUMCISION was unto Peter; (For He that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)" (Gal. 2:7-8).
It was Paul not Peter that wrote doctrinal letters to the Romans and Ephesian Church
PETER is NOWHERE called the Apostle to the Gentiles! This would have kept him from going to Rome to become the head of a Gentile church. He would have been in rebellion to the call of God on him if he had gone to the gentiles
It is Paul that wanted to build the church at Rome. That fact proved that Peter was not the "bishop " of Rome. As Paul told us he would not build on another foundation.
"Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, LEST I SHOULD BUILD UPON ANOTHER MAN’S FOUNDATION" (Rom. 15:20).
When Paul wrote to the church at Rome Peters name is no where listed
Around 45 A.D., we find Peter being cast into prison at Jerusalem (Acts 12:3, 4). In 49 A.D., he was still in Jerusalem, this time attending the Jerusalem Council. About 51 A.D., he was in Antioch of Syria where he got into differences with Paul because he wouldn't sit or eat with Gentiles.
66 A.D., we find him in the city of Babylon among the Jews (I Pet. 5:13). Peter was the Apostle to the CIRCUMCISED.History shows that there were as many Jews in the Mesopotamian areas in Christ’s time as there were in Palestine.
Peter was an obedient apostle Of Christ and he carried out with honor the work the Lord had ordained for him to do , and that work never included being a bishop to a gentile church
And when there had been much disputing, Peter, rising up, said to them: Men, brethren, you know, that in former days God made choice among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.Yes, St. James appears to be presiding over the Jerusalem Council. Not surprusing, given that he was the Bishop of Jerusalem. There is nothing though that indicates any disputation with Peter over the matter of treatment of the Gentiles, and the divine inspiration that the dietetic law of Moses should be lifted was given St. Peter.(Acts 15:7)
There was an instance where St. Paul contradicted St. Peter, over his not sharing meals with the Gentiles. Yes, a similar level of disagreement, and in fact quite larger is possible today with respect to the pope. Besides, there is no indication that St. Peter was pope at the time Galatians (or Romans) was written. In fact, your own timeline shows St,. Peter in "Babylon" in AD 66, full 15 years later. That Babylon was code word for Rome, not the ruins of Babylon in Mesopothamia, which no one had any business visiting.
The two letters of St. Peter are intended for the entire Christian ecumen. In fact, he finishes the Second Letter with a reference to the Letters of St. Paul, which shows that he was apostle to all, not just the Jews. Peter early indicates awareness of his divine commission and his intention to pass it down through generations in his Second Letter:
11 For so an entrance shall be ministered to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. 12 For which cause I will begin to put you always in remembrance of these things: though indeed you know them, and are confirmed in the present truth. 13 But I think it meet as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance. 14 Being assured that the laying away of this my tabernacle is at hand, according as our Lord Jesus Christ also hath signified to me. 15 And I will endeavour, that you frequently have after my decease, whereby you may keep a memory of these things.16 For we have not by following artificial fables, made known to you the power, and presence of our Lord Jesus Christ; but we were eyewitnesses of his greatness. 17 For he received from God the Father, honour and glory: this voice coming down to him from the excellent glory: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him. 18 And this voice we heard brought from heaven, when we were with him in the holy mount. 19 And we have the more firm prophetical word: whereunto you do well to attend, as to a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.