[Campion]

But...but...but...the Pope is supposed to be infallible in matters of theology.

Just to expand on what gbcdoj said, the Pope is only infallible when his teaching meets four conditions:

1. The Pope must be speaking as supreme pontiff, not as, e.g., a private doctor or as the Bishop of Rome
2. The teaching must be addressed to the whole church
3. It must concern a doctrine of faith or morals, not, e.g., a matter of church discipline or governance
4. It must definitively teach that doctrine as something that must be held by all Catholics

It's common that a Papal teaching will meet condition #3, but conditions #1 and #2 are rarer, and condition #4 is met very infrequently. A great deal of consultation and study would go into anything that met all 4 conditions before it was ever formally promulgated.

[magisterium]

True. But the whole slant to the article was the aspect of the job that concentrates on vetting the speeches beforehand, as that in itself would be a full-time job. His role is to screen for content so the pope doesn't have to spend much time dealing with it. The pope has many other things to deal with besides writing speeches. He is only a man, and only has 24 hours in each day to deal with things, just like the rest of us. It's only natural that day-to-day things like screening speeches would be a delegated assignment. Or do non-Catholics ascribe to the pope supernatural powers over time and human endurance that we Catholics wouldn't dare to presume he has?

Infallibility is highly restricted (see Campion's response)in the times and circumstances under which it may be employed; no Catholic even claims that the situation is otherwise. Unless you are very much the "newbie" to this forum, you can't possibly glean from the Catholics here that we think every utterance of the pope is infallible. It's understood that there is disagreement between us about the nature and role of infallibility, but don't create mere straw-men to attack here. Read what we say, try to understand it. Go to other legitimate Catholic sources. But don't just throw empty arguments around , especially when they have already been refuted on this forum umpteen times already.

[Alex Murphy]

The Pope must be speaking as supreme pontiff, not as, e.g., a private doctor or as the Bishop of Rome

Exactly how and when does "supreme pontiff" become invoked, as opposed to being the "Bishop of Rome"? May I assume he has to have on his tallest, pointy hat, and be punched in to work? Check.

The teaching must be addressed to the whole church

He can't be talking in private, or to a limited group of people. Check.

It must concern a doctrine of faith or morals, not, e.g., a matter of church discipline or governance

How does this square with the whole dogma of "Papal Infallibility" itself, seeing as it speaks directly to church governance? Still, the princicple is understood so...check.

It must definitively teach that doctrine as something that must be held by all Catholics

At work we refer to that as a "minimum data set". Check.