>>655476
>>655465
>>655462
>>655449
He didn't say it's empty though, he said that it's possible that it's empty, which is true insofar that there are Catholic theologians that have been advocating this view and who, as far as I know, weren't condemned by the Church for this. So it's a legitimate matter for theologians to discuss whether Hell being empty is consistent with the Magisterium or not.
And anyway, even if he is genuinely wrong, it's a small, insignificant remark, and it's absolutely expected of a person who speaks and teaches much, and who is also a fallible human, to make at least one error somewhere. This happened even to the greatest saints, even people like St. Thomas Aquinas would err sometimes. Because however great theologians they were, they were still fallible. As long as their errors are small, irrelevant, honest mistakes, there is no point in making them the focus of our consideration of them. We don't do this with Aquinas, whose teachings have much more authority and relevance, so I don't see why we should concentrate our attention so hard on one, understandable mistake of Barron. Obsessing over it distorts our view of his overall work, in the same way that obsessing over Aquinas's small, rare errors whenever he is mentioned would.