You mean, who is going to bring Pope and his fans to account for reinterpreting as in this thread the Holy Scripture? That credits Simon for chairing this council rather than James? For a council that was inaugurated to deal with Judaizers undercutting Paul's evangelization of the Gentiles, which was within his purview and not Simon's?
"And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision" (Gal. 2:9 AV; 'they' and not Kefas alone).
Nothing like imputing ignorance and ill will to those who reasonably see things otherwise, eh?
Wasn't it Paul that verbally and effectively took Peter (= Kephas, meaning 'hollow rock') to the woodshed and soundly spanked him before the authorities of the Antioch assembly for doing exactly the opposite of what Peter finally later admitted to the Jerusalem church?
"But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?" (Gal 2:14 AV).
Why do y'all do such things to twist the truth that is given to us in the Scriptures? And expect that the Bible believers not legitimately straighten the matter out?
If Pope is not bumbling, then he is likely deliberately misrepresenting the annals of the Acts of the Apostles.
In fact, I see that the result of this local church council was caused by the Antioch church exercising discipline on the Jerusalem church, who ought not to have been sending out representatives that undermined the Pauline effort, including Peter, who even tried to dissolve the Paul/Barnabas evangelistic team authorized by the Holy Spirit through the doctrinally correct Antiochans to send them out as missionaries.
"As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them" (Act 13:2 AV).
While they were away, and Peter came to Antioch:
"And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation" (Gal 2:13 AV).
So, what do you make of that?
Butting in here, it is note that it was not the Jerusalem leadership that sent out Paul and Barnabas, much less Rome, nor even any apostles, but certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. (Acts 13:1)
However, it is not indicated that Peter was trying to dissolve the Paul/Barnabas evangelistic team, but that in when "certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision." (Galatians 2:12)
Peter's declension was one of weakness, of fear (been there), but this was a rare exception, and inconsistent with his professed belief and support of Paul, for as he attested (I do not think Gal. 2 happened before Acts 15), "Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean." (Acts 10:28)
Yet this does not support the RC papacy, which cannot even find Peter in the letter to the church at Rome, and which absence results in the absurd RC pleading that Paul did not mention him because of persecution, yet he has no problem mentioning over 30 other people!