Hi Vivian,

Thanks for the note.

I have heard some Catholic apologists stretch this section a little further than I think it naturally goes. This is, after all, a council, and not merely an exercise of Peter's authority, although we can use this to our advantage as well, since it sets the pattern for the ecumenical council (which Protestants don't believe in, either). Even in ecumenical councils, "there is much discussion" among the bishops; the pope, typically, only confirms the decision. We do have to be careful in apologetics to not overplay our hand (lest we look foolish) and to pick our battles carefully, remembering that there is much to support what we believe and we needn't suck every verse we find dry.

That being said, with respect to the interplay between James and Peter, it can be pointed out that

• James is making a decision about how to put Peter's beliefs into practice,
• while Peter is laying down what 'we believe' (which is exactly what a Pope would do).

Note that in verse 14 he says:

So in a sense, he is accepting what Peter has taught. Then he says,

"it is my judgment, *therefore* ..."

In other words, James is not settling the theological argument. He is turning to how to enforce what Peter has declared.

Also notice that Paul and Barnabas, who speak following Peter, don't make arguments, but rather simply bear witness to what God is doing among the Gentiles, as if to confirm what Peter taught. While Peter is not the last to speak, the "discussion" ends after Peter speaks. Everyone who follows simply confirms what Peter has taught and proposes how to put it into practice.

• So how is James able to do this if Peter is Pope?

Well, because the doctrine of Papal authority doesn't make it a one-man show. Again, in defending the Pope's authority we mustn't exaggerate it. Peter is not the only leader, nor is he a micro manager, just the chief leader whose primary role is settling disputes.

I hope this helps, Vivian! Let me know if you have any other questions.

Yours in Christ,

Eric