"Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and seperated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the Gospel, I said to Peter before them all, 'If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?'..." Gal. 2:11-14
The range of interpretations of this passage is most interesting.
Saint John Chrysostom, in his commentary on this passage, seems to think that Peter and Paul were, in a way, working together for the edification of the brethren in Antioch, and trying to guide them into the truth by example (even if using deception to set up a context for the teaching). Saint John does not seem to think that Peter had actually sinned or deserved rebuke, but that there was more going on here than is actually said in the text. (Saint John gives this type of interpretation for other passages as well; cf Homily 36 on Matthew)
Eusebius of Caesarea, the first major Church Historian, thought that the Peter ("Cephas") mentioned in this passage was not in fact the Apostle Peter (who was bishop of Antioch and Rome), but one of the 70 disciples (Lk. 10:1) sent out by Jesus during his earthly ministry. (Ecclesiastical History, 1, 12)
Tertullian, following the interpretation most commonly seen, believes that Paul did in fact correct Peter, but hastens to note that it was over a small error (Against Marcion, 5, 3)
I wonder how other Fathers and early Christian commentators understood this passage…