Did St. James (+69 AD) Hold Authority Over the Apostles at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15)?

Catholicism and Eastern Orthodox Perspectives

Some Catholics might point to the Council of Jerusalem (AD 49) as an example of a clear Petrine supremacy and that James merely submits. I would say it is incorrect to say that James offered merely advice whereas Peter pronounced the authoritative judgment at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15). For Chrysostom, it is certainly the case that James alone gives the authoritative judgment.

Wow. Alone?

Let's be careful here. If you aren't reading Chrysostom's commentary close enough you can become equally incorrect in coming away thinking that Chrysostom thought James actually had authority over the College of Apostles.

Let me give you the short story and then I'll give you the longer story below.

The short story: In his commentary, Chrysostom makes a significant observation of how the Apostolic council in Jerusalem was completely devoid of "lust for power", "vain desire", "pomp", and "a contest for authority." How does he see this achieved? By pointing out how those who are TRULY higher in authority, i.e., Peter and the Apostles, are content to play roles that is more appropriate for inferiors, and then he who is TRULY lesser in authority, i.e., James, is privileged to play the role of the final judge. Moreover, because the Apostles gave the bishopric of Jerusalem to James, it was more than appropriate for this to happen since the Apostles were, at this juncture, unbounded in their ministry, whereas James was fixed to the flock of Jerusalem.

The long story? Let's explore.

First, let me say I don't know any Christian tradition that holds St. James, brother of the Lord, to really have a higher office or authority than the 12 Apostles. And of the 12 Apostles, St. John the Golden Mouth was clear, as would become standard for Greek and Latin tradition, the Coryphaeus and Chief Shepherd is Simon Peter alone. Over and over again Chrysostom speaks of Peter's universal primacy over the Apostles and the universal Church. That point will play in once we reach the end where Chrysostom explicitly gives a concrete contrast between James and Peter in the context of divine assignment.

But let's look at Chrysostom's commentary on Acts 15 (the Council of Jerusalem):

How should we understand St. John on the "authority" of James? For this, we should observe close the 33rd Homily of the Acts of the Apostles.

Chrysostom begins:

"This (James) was bishop, as they say, and therefore he speaks last"

Here, James is said to speak last on account of his occupying the Episcopal chair in that city-Church: Jerusalem. None of Apostles occupied that chair.

He goes on:

"But observe the discretion shown by him [James] also, in making his argument good from the prophets, both new and old. For he had no acts of his own to declare, as Peter had and Paul. And indeed it is wisely ordered that this (the active) part is assigned to those, as not intended to be locally fixed in Jerusalem, whereas (James) here, who performs the part of teacher, is no way responsible for what has been done, while however he is not divided from them in opinion."

Here Chrysostom says that James takes from the Biblical record whereas Peter and Paul had "acts of their own" to declare. This is done in providence, per Chrysostom, because to declare acts of their own to testify to the truth is meant to have a universal message rather than one fixed to the local city-Church of Jerusalem (as in the case of James). In other words, it was appropriate for Peter and Paul to herald the works of God wrought through them because of their universal testimony, whereas because James is there to teach the Jerusalem flock, he is left to allow these testimonies for people not fixed to the teaching office of Jerusalem.

He goes on:

"After Peter Paul speaks, and none silences him: James waits patiently, not starts up (to speak the next message). Great the orderliness (of the proceedings). No word speaks John here, no word the other Apostles, but held their peace, for James was invested with the chief rule, and think it no hardship (i.e, it was no difficulty to manifest themselves over James). So clean was their soul from love of glory. And after that they had held their peace, James answered. Peter indeed spoke more strongly, but James here more mildly: for thus it behooves one in high authority, to leave what is unpleasant for others to say, while he himself appears in the milder part."

Peter speaks first. Elsewhere, Chrysostom understands the initiative to signify a place of primacy. For example, in his commentary on Peter's speech from the upper room on the day of Pentecost, he writes:

"'Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said.' (etc., etc.) Both as being ardent, and as having been put in trust by Christ with the flock, and as having precedence in honor, he always begins the discourse." (Homily 3 on the Acts of the Apostles)

Therefore, speaking first has its own signification. But let's not get too far afield.

What are we to make of the glaring commentary that comes after which seems to say that not just all the other Apostles, but Peter himself, is subjugated to the supreme authority of James? But that's quite apart from his intention. He is speaking about how the whole synod was devoid of the "love of glory", and thus the other Apostles don't even speak after Peter and Paul speak, leaving James to enjoy the episcopal responsibility. Peter and Paul had been gifted with miraculous "acts of their own" to declare. After that, no Apostles says anything. Then Chrysostom says Peter spoke "strongly" whereas James comes in at the end "more mildly", and for the reason that it is appropriate for those in high authority to speak more mildly while leaving others to do things that are "unpleasant".

But here again, Chrysostom is not all of the sudden turning the convocation into a demonstration of the love of glory by James manifesting himself as one who is higher than all the others. Rather, Chrysostom is following in the same line of thought: just like the other Apostles patiently sit in silence, so James (the LEAST OF THEM) is appropriated the place of higher authority in light of the care given to him BY THOSE VERY APOSTLES (c.f. Chrysostom's 3rd Homily on the Acts of the Apostles)

When it comes to giving a concrete comparison to James and Peter, one should simply consult Chrysostom's 88th homily on the Gospel of John:

"And if any should say, 'How then did James receive the chair at Jerusalem?' I would make this reply, that He appointed Peter teacher, not of the chair [of Jerusalem], but of the world." (Homilies on John 88)

Much more could be said. I'll leave it here.