On the topic of the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) and the question as to who was in charge, Colin Lindsay offered the following in favour of Peter instead of James:
The proceedings of this Council have been held by some to prove the superior position of S. James as the President of the Council; but it is very questionable whether the acts of this synod will support this view. In the first place, it is not said that S. James presided, nor does the text imply it; then, secondly, S. James did not take the lead in the discussion. Let this point be carefully considered. First, there was much disputing, by whom is not stated; but after awhile, S. Peter arose, and in the language of authority addressed the assembled Apostles and elders. He, first of all, informs them of the revelation he had received from God on the subject; and he then rebukes the party of the circumcision, saying, “Why tempt ye God to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples?” S. Paul and S. Barnabas do not seem to have spoken on the subject in dispute, contenting themselves with recounting the great miracles and wonders which had been wrought among the Gentiles. S. James closes the debate, and delivers his judgement; but how? His judgment is based professedly upon that of S. Peter, “Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles,” and then he adduces the testimony of prophecy in support of what S. Peter had said, concluding, “Wherefore my sentence, or decree,” &c. There is nothing in this account which witnesses against S. Peter; on the contrary, what little is said confirms the position he is alleged to have held, for he first delivered judgment, and the cause was virtually concluded; from all accepted his judgment as final. S. James did but echo what S. Peter said, and supported it by reference to the prophecies. (See S. Chrys. Extract, No. 77, Pt. II.) (Colin Lindsay, The Evidence for the Papacy: As Derived from the Holy Scriptures and From Primitive Antiquity; With an Introductory Epistle [London: Longmans, 1870], 11)
Commenting on Acts 15:19 and James’ use of διὸ ἐγὼ κρίνω (“therefore I judge”), Joseph Fitzmyer wrote the following that attempts to dilute the force of the use of the verb κρινω:
19. So my judgement is that we ought to stop causing trouble for Gentiles who are turning to God. Lit. , “therefore I judge that we should not trouble.” The verb krinen is used not in the sense of formal judicial decision, as Lake and Cadbury (Beginnings, 4.177), Johnson (Acts, 264, 266) have understood it, but of James’s opinion, as he concludes from the Scripture just quoted. Compare the less formal use of krinein in 13:46; 16:15; 21:25; 25:25; 26:8, as Schneider (Apg., 2.183) and Weiser (Apg., 383) have taken it. James’s conclusion thus supports Peter’s position, even though he adds a stipulation that is not contradictory of that fundamental position. (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Acts of the Apostles: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary [AB 31; New Haven: Yale University Press,1998], 556)
