Because they were Monothelite heretics, and not Orthodox, when they submitted to the Vatican.
And when did he deny him the usage of the title for the sake of himself having to alone? The Title isn't user by the Coptic Catholic Patriarch to avoid offending the Coptic Orthodox Pope Tawardos IISo your Melkites, Maronites and Syriacs use the title "Patriarch of Antioch" to offend the successor of St. Peter, Patriarch John X of Antioch, and the Latins as well-still insulting the successor of St. James, the Brother of God, Patriarch Theophilos III.
Nope because the man you named is not the canonical Patriarch. Patriarch Gregory III Laham is
And what about this guy? And this guy? It appears that you can't even decide who the real Patriarch of Antioch is.
There is a reason why all three are acknowledged..Check their histories.
Okay. I did. They came out of sections of preexisting Orthodox churches, with the possible exception of the Maronites (depending on whose history you believe). Certainly this proves...something...but it's probably not anything a Roman Catholic would like to hear.
The Maronites are the only eastern Church to not have an Orthodox counterpart.
From the Catholic POV the Antiochan Orthodox Church came into existence after the Antiochan schism due the the legitimate Patriarch and fellows coming into communion with Rome and Constantinople raising a rival bishop (For the Orthodox) to that of the Catholics.The robber synod which elected Patriarch Cyril was not even recognized by the Vatican nor the Latins in Syria. The legitimate Synod of Antioch elected Sylvester and sent for him (he was at the time on Mt. Athos).
More like legitimate synod and the robber synod of Constantinople that elected Sylvester
LOL. No, which is simple to demonstrate: The Synod that elected Sylvester was convened by the Patriarch of Antioch at Aleppo from his deathbed. Constantinople didn't elect him, but according to the laws and canons of the time, it did have to confirm him ("berat").
That's before getting into the irregularities of two renegade bishops colluding in opposition of the Holy Synod convened by the Patriarch, ordain a third (itself problematic) and then claim to ordain as a Patriarch a monk without leave from his monastery.
Election of Cyril VI[edit source]
The fourth defining moment was the election of Cyril VI Tanas, in 1724, by the Melkite bishops of Syria as the new Patriarch of Antioch. As Cyril was considered to be pro-Western, the Patriarch Jeremias III of Constantinople feared that his authority would be compromised. Therefore, Jeremias declared Cyril's election to be invalid, excommunicated him, and ordained the deacon Sylvester of Antioch, a Greek monk a priest and bishop, then appointed him to the patriarchal See of Antioch.
Sylvester exacerbated divisions with his heavy-handed rule of the church as many Melkites acknowledged Cyril's claim to the patriarchal throne. It was obvious to all that Cyril had been legitimately elected and consecrated, and that Jeremias had attempted to remove him only to bolster his own authority over the Antiochian Patriarchate. This Greek domination over the Byzantine Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch lasted until 1899.) Jeremias and Sylvester began a five year campaign of persecution against Cyril and the Melkite faithful who supported him, enforced by Ottoman Turkish troops.
Five years after the election of Cyril VI, in 1729, Pope Benedict XIII recognized Cyril as the legitimate Patriarch of Antioch and recognized his followers as being in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church.  From this time onwards, the Melkite Greek-Catholic Church has existed separately from and in parallel to the Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch in Western Asia; the latter is no longer referred to as Melkite. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melkite_Greek_Catholic_Church
It is a simple matter as to who was the legitimate patriarch, before even getting into the irregularities of the synod of Damascus.
At the time, to become Patriarch of Antioch, one had to be 1) elected by a Synod of the Patriarchate including at least three bishops of the Patriarchate, 2) be consecrated by the three bishops 3) receive the "berat" from Constantinople (the berat vested the patriarchate in the Patriarch, who was also the secular authority over the Christians within the patriarchate, giving him the power over the properties of the Church and the authority both temporal and spiritual over the faithful. As "Patriarch" Cyril never received the berat, he is disqualified from the start.
Patriarch Sylvester was high handed, but that has no bearing on legitimacy. It does explain, however, how "Patriarch" Cyril was able to attract a following wanting to legitimize him.
Like many of his fellow clerics Seraphim Tanas favored re-establishing communion with the Roman Catholic Church. He was elected in 1724 by the Melkites of Damascus as the new Patriarch of Antioch, and was consecrated as Cyril VI in the patriarchal cathedral of Damascus on October 1, 1724 by Neophytos Nasri, bishop of Saidnaya assisted by Basile Finas, bishop of Baias and by Euthymius Fadel, bishop of Zahle and Forzol:55. As Cyril was a prominent pro-Westerner, Orthodox Patriarch Jeremias III of Constantinople, felt his authority was challenged. Jeremias declared Cyril's election to be invalid, excommunicated him, and appointed Sylvester of Antioch (1696–1766), a young Greek monk, to the patriarchal See of Antioch. Jeremias consecrated bishop Sylvester in Istanbul on October 8, 1724.
The sultan withdrew the recognition initially conferred on Cyril, who was forced to flee as emissaries of Sylvester arrived from Constantiople with a mandate for his arrest. Cyril took refuge at the Holy Savior Monastery near Sidon, located in modern-day Lebanon. Cyril's safety there was guaranteed by the Shehab emirs. Sylvester unleashed a hard persecution against all who elected or supported Cyril: many people were exiled and all churches were taken by Sylvester's party. This persecution strengthened the faith of the Catholic Melkites who, even without a formal hierarchy, continued to increase in number meeting in secret places and celebrating the Divine Liturgy in homes at night.:327–328
Although the populace of Aleppo was mainly pro-Catholic in sentiment, the people initially supported Sylvester. However, Sylvester exacerbated divisions with his heavy-handed rule of the church, and many Melkites chose to acknowledge Cyril VI as patriarch instead. The people united against Sylvester, forcing him to flee Aleppo.:33–34 The Greek domination over the Byzantine Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch lasted until 1899.
Notwithstanding the many requests by Cyril for recognition, the Papacy moved with great caution and took six years to recognize Cyril as the legitimate Patriarch of Antioch. The decision was made by Pope Benedict XIII and communicated, almost unofficially, to the Melkites in the synod held on April 25, 1730. From this time onwards, the Melkite Greek Catholic Church has existed separately from and in parallel to the Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch in the Middle East http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_VI_Tanas
Several factual errors, all of them fatal to your case.
Constantinople did not "appoint" Sylvester, who was chosen by the Holy Synod of Antioch on the recommendation of the dying Patriarch, which sent for Sylvester and asked for his release from Constantinople-he was a monk on Mt. Athos at the time, but had been the Patriarchal deacon.
The Porte never recognized "Pat." Cyril. The governor of Damascus had promised to secure the berat for him, but after he returned from pilgrimage to Mecca. By then, however, Sylvester had already been consecrated and received the berat, the Porte deferring such matters to the EP, who had consecrated Sylvester, along with the Standing Synod of Constantinople, which included the delegation of the Holy Synod of Antioch. Hence there was never any recognition to withdraw. Btw, the governor of Damascus was not in a position to secure a berat, as he was sacked.
Of course Patriarch Sylvester took all the Churches. The berat vested them all in him.
I could go on, but that is more than enough.
Rome did Recognize his election but took time for various reasons:
Canonically and legally, the Vatican was not in a position to recognize his election: the preceding Patriarchs had visited Ukraine, and seeing what the "Union of Brest" had done, made sure of that, adopting canons (which took the force of law in the Millet of Rum Antakya) prohibiting links with the Vatican.
By the time the Vatican tried to "legitimize" the synod of Damascus, Patriarch Sylvester was in firm control of the Patriarchate.
East. The pallium, formal recognition of the patriarchal authority, was granted by Rome to Cyril only on February 3, 1744, about twenty years after the 1724 election.
The reasons for this caution and delay by Rome to recognize Cyril as patriarch can be summarized as follows:
The election of Cyril had been not planned by Rome and Rome already had Catholic professions of faith by the previous patriarchs Athanasius III Dabbas (in 1687) and Cyril Zaim (in 1716). Rome didn't want to split the Melkite hierarchy hoping for a complete union. Only the persecutions by Sylvester and the incoming Greek domination over the Byzantine Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch left no other choice.
Cyril followed Euthymios Saifi in introducing many Liturgical Latinisations, dividing thus the Catholic Melkites between who kept the byzantine rite untouched and who mixed the rites. For this reason many Catholic Melkite monks were initially very suspicious of Cyril. As already happened for Euthymios Saifi, the Pope took a strong position against Cyril's latinizations, and his recognition in 1729 was subject to his renouncing any changes to the Byzantine rite and uses.:76 The latinizations, supported by many Latin missionaries (particularly by the Franciscans), continued to be a problem in the Melkite Church until the final position taken by the Pope on December 24, 1743, with the issue of the encyclical Demandatam that put an end to the mix of rites. This same document forbade Latin missionaries to accept the faithful of Byzantine Rites into the Latin Rite.
Cyril VI Tanas summoned synods in 1736, 1751 and 1756 in order to give a structure to the Melkite Church, but without a full success. He died on January 10, 1760, leaving a complicated succession.
LOL. Yeah, he ordained his nephew to succeed him, an offense punishable by deposition and voiding of the ordination under the canons. Not even the Vatican swallowed that-until much later-and appointed (much as is claimed EP Jeremiah III did, just that the Vatican had no authority to do so) Maximos "Patriarch."