John Chrysostom

"And the Apostles and brethren that were in Judea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God. And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him, saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them." After such great things, "they of the circumcision contended:" not the Apostles; God forbid. It means, they took no small offence. And see what they allege. They do not say, Why didst thou preach? but, Why didst thou eat with them? …

Homily on Acts 24 ↗

Theophylact of Ohrid

You see what zeal they had concerning the law. They were not ashamed before Peter's dignity, nor the miracles that had taken place, nor that wonderful preparation that had been made for the reception of the word, but began to dispute about such trifles. Those of the circumcision disputed, not the apostles. And they do not say "why did you preach?" but "why did you eat?" Peter did not dwell on this trifle, but based himself on what was of great importance. …

Commentary on Acts ↗

Oecumenius

Peter showed in his defense that he had by no means been the cause, but God everywhere. For he said, he himself set me in the excess of mind, he himself pointed out the sheet, and I indeed even contradicted; again the same he himself said, and I did not hear therefore. The Spirit commanded that I should join them, and having joined I did not even run on therefore. They said that God had sent, and I did not so baptize, but again God accomplished the whole matter. God baptized, not I. …

Commentary on Acts ↗