In Infallibility: The Crossroads of Doctrine (1977), by Peter Chirico, S.S., the author argues against a simple-minded interpretation of the criteria for papal infallibility (p. 229):
Generations of student priests have been brought up with the belief that God decreed four conditions (the number usually given in the textbooks) under which the pope is infallible. These conditions apparently derive from divine fiat and have no assigned rooting in the nature of things. They were not discoverable in the Bible; they were not grounded in the nature of human and Christian understanding; they were simply decreed by the council as four separate conditions that had to be achieved before the pope became infallible. Further, as soon as the pope announced explicitly or implicitly that these conditions had been fulfilled, by that fact he became instantly infallible. If he were going to make an incorrect statement, God would strike him dead or prevent him in some other way from speaking. Hence one could understand how W. G. Ward might hope for a new infallible statement by the pope daily at breakfast, along with his Times. The above might seem to be a caricature of the teaching of the textbook theologians. However, it comes dangerously close to the interior understanding of infallibility of many a loyal Catholic layman, priest, and bishop.
(Footnote): For the kind of textbook treatment most priests have been exposed to see A. Tanquerey, Synopsis Theologiae Dogmaticae, I, 26th ed. (Paris: Desclee, 1949), pp. 585-603. Hardly two pages are given to an explanation of the conditions of infallibility, and no attempt is made to explain why these conditions are required. Tanquerey’s treatment is typical of the education of priests on the subject in most parts of the world prior to 1960. This is the approach which practially all bishops in office in today’s Church have been taught, since most of them were in the seminary prior to 1960.
I was wondering how many here would agree with what Fr. Chirico says here, versus how many would claim that the strawman he presents actually captures the true teaching of the Church as regards papal infallibility.