however, note that with the exception of Pope Gregory, the others were not Popes and you said quotes from supposed early Popes
now to your points -- from Pope Gregory, they affirm the belief that to be a priest, more a bishop, more a Pope is a difficult job but it does not contradict the concept of Papal primacy, on the contrary it affirms it as you point out the sees of Antioch and Alexandria -- Whereas there were many apostles, yet for the principality itself, one only see of the apostles prevailed, in authority, which is of one, but in three places. For he elevated the see in which he condescended to rest, and to finish his present life. He decorated the see, to which he sent his disciple the evangelist, and he established the see, in which, although he intended to leave it, he sat for seven years. -- the role of Bishop of Rome is first among equals. The other Patriarchs including the Bishop of Alexandria and the Patriarch of Antioch were of equal "respect" as conveyed in that letter
SEcondly -- have you cross verified that these are even authentic? It says for the first "book 5, torn" -- and I don't see htat in the list of Pope Gregory's letters
Thirdly, would you really take a book that called itself "A Sketch on the Honkey primacy and the sin of the White man" published by the Nation of Islam as a valid, unbiased source of European history? Similary, why would you take this book as an unbiased source? The quotes from the book do not "prove" any of their points and the headings lead into the questions -- a warning point even in a book akin to the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion"
“... the role of Bishop of Rome is first among equals. The other Patriarchs including the Bishop of Alexandria and the Patriarch of Antioch were of equal “respect” as conveyed in that letter”
From the Catechism:
882 The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter’s successor, “is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful.”402 “For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.”403
883 “The college or body of bishops has no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter’s successor, as its head.” As such, this college has “supreme and full authority over the universal Church; but this power cannot be exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff.”404
884 “The college of bishops exercises power over the universal Church in a solemn manner in an ecumenical council.”405 But “there never is an ecumenical council which is not confirmed or at least recognized as such by Peter’s successor.”406
If the Pope is first of equals, it certainly is not equality in power. The Pope is described as having “supreme” and “universal” power over the whole church. No Bishop can claim to possess those powers, or claim that he is immune from a decision of the Pope.
That is what makes Gregory’s quotes so interesting, since he specifically affirms that “three Bishops preside” with divine authority over the See of Peter. As well as condemning the concept of the “universal Bishop.” Interestingly, the Pope immediately following Gregory had the Emperor affirm his title of “Universal Bishop.” A title that has stuck, apparently. While Gregory did believe that Peter had special primacy, this authority was shared equally by the Bishops, in three places, who nevertheless represented one See.
Theodoret references the same belief:
“Dioscorus, however, refuses to abide by these decisions; he is turning the See of the blessed Mark upside down; and these things he does though he perfectly well knows that the Antiochene (of Antioch) metropolis possesses the throne of the great Peter, who was teacher of the blessed Mark, and first and coryphæus (head of the choir) of the chorus of the apostles.” Theodoret - Letter LXXXVI - To Flavianus, Bishop of Constantinople.
As for the veracity of all the quotes present, I’m aware that the references are funky, which was why I introduced it as coming from a particular book. The book itself is maybe around 200 years old, so all the citations are necessarily about 200 years old, and older. The quotes, however, can be found with a quick google search, quoted over and over again on Catholic and Protestant websites, being debated.