The difference between Fr Ripperger's catechesis on spiritual warfare (and the prayers to wage it), and the criticism of his detractors, is that he draws from the study of what Church Doctors, Saints, and the Church have determined.

His detractors draw from their feelings and emotions.

I'm not interested in detracting Fr. Ripperger personally or in condemning what is good in his teaching. But, for example, I've heard a number of people admit, often reluctantly, that they felt oppressed or somehow harmed after praying his Auxilium Christianorum prayers daily. So it made me reconsider and look closer at what he was teaching.

Here's a daily prayer from AC

Most gracious Virgin Mary, thou who wouldst crush the head of the
serpent, protect us from the vengeance of the evil one. We offer our prayers,
supplications, sufferings and good works to thee so that thou may purify them,
sanctify them and present them to thy Son as a perfect offering.

May this offering be given so that the demons that influence or seek to influence the members of the
Auxilium Christianorum do not know the source of their expulsion and blindness.
Blind them so that they know not our good works. Blind them so that they know
not on whom to take vengeance. Blind them so that they may receive the just
sentence for their works. Cover us with the Precious Blood of thy Son so that we
may enjoy the protection which flows from His Passion and Death. Amen

The first couple sentences are great, but then it gets kinda strange:

May this offering be given so that the demons that influence or seek to influence the members of the
Auxilium Christianorum do not know the source of their expulsion and blindness.

Blind them so that they know not our good works.
Blind them so that they know not on whom to take vengeance.
Blind them so that they may receive the just sentence for their works.

Firstly, the actual source is God himself and the intercession of our Lady, not the members of AC. So why would a person ask that the demons be blinded to what they already know?


Secondly, demons can only do what God allows them to do, not one iota more, so why does the prayer take such a defensive and fearful stance? (like a legal contract trying to close any loopholes)
Why does it ask for them to be blinded "so that they may receive the just sentence for their works", they already have received their just sentence, they're DAMNED; that's what makes them demons.

Even Ray Charles could see there's something wrong with this blinding business

... he draws from the study of what Church Doctors, Saints, and the Church have determined.

...

This is the more fundamental problem with this aspect of his teaching; the prayers of his own composition don't really seem to bear out that statement.

I don't find Saints teaching people to say binding-prayers.

I don't find similar prayers in old prayer-books.

The closest that I can find in Papal teaching is the St. Michael prayer, but it doesn't take Ripperger's approach; it mostly exalts the intercession of St. Michael and predicts what we are living now:

In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered.

In summary, I honestly think much of his spiritual warfare teaching is just exciting novelty. The Church's teaching is actually pretty simple but it's "boring": do your duty.

If that is the case, it should be a rather simply thing to quote Church Doctors, Saints, and the magisterium as proof of that assertion.

He does that in Dominion and doesn't stop there. He ties it all together with natural law, divine law, imprecatory and deprecatory prayer, and more. 

All of this isn't simple as it would seem.

More later, I'm still at work.

I'm not interested in detracting Fr. Ripperger personally or in condemning what is good in his teaching. But, for example, I've heard a number of people admit, often reluctantly, that they felt oppressed or somehow harmed after praying his Auxilium Christianorum prayers daily. So it made me reconsider and look closer at what he was teaching.

Here's a daily prayer from AC
The first couple sentences are great, but then it gets kinda strange:

Firstly, the actual source is God himself and the intercession of our Lady, not the members of AC. So why would a person ask that the demons be blinded to what they already know?


Secondly, demons can only do what God allows them to do, not one iota more, so why does the prayer take such a defensive and fearful stance? (like a legal contract trying to close any loopholes)
Why does it ask for them to be blinded "so that they may receive the just sentence for their works", they already have received their just sentence, they're DAMNED; that's what makes them demons.

Even Ray Charles could see there's something wrong with this blinding business


This is the more fundamental problem with this aspect of his teaching; the prayers of his own composition don't really seem to bear out that statement.

I don't find Saints teaching people to say binding-prayers.

I don't find similar prayers in old prayer-books.

The closest that I can find in Papal teaching is the St. Michael prayer, but it doesn't take Ripperger's approach; it mostly exalts the intercession of St. Michael and predicts what we are living now:

In summary, I honestly think much of his spiritual warfare teaching is just exciting novelty. The Church's teaching is actually pretty simple but it's "boring": do your duty.

https://stpaulcenter.com/what-to-know-about-catholic-deliverance-and-exorcism/

This is consistent with my experience as well.  Father Ripperger follows the Protestant pattern of "deliverance" and "binding" (both terms are strongly associated with Protestantism, as acknolwedge here in this article also), where his prayers also "encourage... [the faithful] to speak directly to, and command, the demons"  leading to "a tacit acceptance to a personal battle with that demon".

This notion of laity having the authority to cast out demons (vs. the Catholic Tradition that holds Exorcist to be an Order commissioned by the Church) is entirely Protestant.  You hear the same kind of language from the Protestants, who have this notion regarding a "priesthood of believers," where any layman has this authority.  Nor have I ever seen anywhere in Traditional sources this language of "binding" demons, whereas Prot rhetoric is replete with it.

All read and noted.  Emile, I think your questions can be answered after I see what Ripperger says. 
After he addresses the issue of the Protestant claim he writes, before moving on, "So the real question is threefold: (1) who can say binding prayers, (2) can one use a specific name of a demon, (3) what exactly are binding prayers doing ?......... The real question is number three above, namely, what exactly are binding prayers doing ?"

Every question, criticism, and all is addressed in Dominion. And in a near exhaustive manner. So he's not just saying "here, go pray these prayers"

To all, For now just a few quotes from Ripperger.
"Some assert that the church has only passed down to the laity  deprecatory prayers for their use and not imprecatory prayers. However as we have already seen, Saint Alphonsus and St Thomas show that anyone has a right in private to adjurations, that is, commanding demons to depart or do certain things. Since the right to command the demons comes from the Divine positive law and the natural law, it means that the right to adjure comes from God and it binds on the conscience of the individual that if he detects through a proper discernment process that something is diabolic that he, at least, make use of the adjurations in order to protect his own spiritual life. One thing to note is that all human beings after the Fall have essentially been conscripted to engage in spiritual warfare. This follows from the fact that all human beings after the Fall are immersed in the spiritual battle, and therefore, to refuse to take up certain arms in order to engage that spiritual warfare is a sin of omission and negligence. Obviously, the real question is which arms one is to take up and which arms one should not and when one should apply them and when one should not. We have already seen above that it is the Divine positive law and the natural law that both give one the right as well as set the restrictions" 

On the Protestant claim.. 
"This brings to the fore the question of "binding prayers". Some have asserted that binding prayers are not part of the Catholic Church tradition and that, in point of fact, binding prayers are of Protestant origin. Such an assertion shows a lack of theological depth. By way of example, the following may be observed. First, The Binding of demons is mentioned at least three times in Scripture : 1 when the archangel Saint Raphael took the devil and bound him in the desert in upper Egypt. 2 in reference to the house of satan, Our Lord references the fact that one cannot enter into the house of the strong man and rob him of goods unless he first binds him, and then shall he plunder his house. 3 in the book of the Apocalypse, reference is made to Christ taking hold of the dragon, the old serpent which is Satan, and binding him for a thousand years."

Ripperger's footnote regarding the passage from Mark..

"In this passage, even though our Lord is talking about the strong man as to the vocabulary, the reference is to the demons. In
 fact it is necessary to bind the demons in order to strip them of the things that they are doing. St Thomas in his Catena Aurea notes that St Chrysostom observes that the desolation of the kingdom of the devil approaches as men will begin to repel Satan, and that one must first bind the demons before one can expel them." 

Ripperger continues..
"Second, The Binding of demons is also mentioned within the rituals of the Church throughout history..." 
 
Ripperger goes on with several more examples, concluding "from these examples, it becomes clear that The Binding of demons is not something that the Protestants discovered but is actually part of Catholic tradition."  

On the Protestant claim..
"This brings to the fore the question of "binding prayers". Some have asserted that binding prayers are not part of the Catholic Church tradition and that, in point of fact, binding prayers are of Protestant origin. Such an assertion shows a lack of theological depth. By way of example, the following may be observed. First, The Binding of demons is mentioned at least three times in Scripture : 1 when the archangel Saint Raphael took the devil and bound him in the desert in upper Egypt. 2 in reference to the house of satan, Our Lord references the fact that one cannot enter into the house of the strong man and rob him of goods unless he first binds him, and then shall he plunder his house. 3 in the book of the Apocalypse, reference is made to Christ taking hold of the dragon, the old serpent which is Satan, and binding him for a thousand years."

Ripperger's footnote regarding the passage from Mark..

"In this passage, even though our Lord is talking about the strong man as to the vocabulary, the reference is to the demons. In
 fact it is necessary to bind the demons in order to strip them of the things that they are doing. St Thomas in his Catena Aurea notes that St Chrysostom observes that the desolation of the kingdom of the devil approaches as men will begin to repel Satan, and that one must first bind the demons before one can expel them."

Ripperger continues..
"Second, The Binding of demons is also mentioned within the rituals of the Church throughout history..."
 
Ripperger goes on with several more examples, concluding "from these examples, it becomes clear that The Binding of demons is not something that the Protestants discovered but is actually part of Catholic tradition." 

This is a problem I've discovered with Vatican 2 types like Fr. Ripperger. You object to them that their novel teachings and practices are not traditional, and they respond with quotes from Scripture. When we say something is not traditional, it means that it was not done or practiced before Vatican II, or in most of the history of the Church. So, to counter a charge that something is not traditional, what needs to be produced is some evidence that it was done in the past. Thus, if Fr. Ripperger wants to claim that binding prayers are traditional, he needs to produce, for example, a 19th-century book of binding or deliverance prayers, or examples of such prayers in Catholic prayer books before Vatican II.

Instead, he twists some passages from Scripture to support his aberrant practices and claims that is tradition.

Having said that, the arguments he brings forward from Scripture in support of this "binding" nonsense are really bizarre. Let's look at his proofs one at a time.

1 when the archangel Saint Raphael took the devil and bound him in the desert in upper Egypt.

The Archangel St. Raphael is not some lay person reading his book. Just because the Archangel St. Raphael can do something, it doesn't follow that therefore Aunt Tillie who just bought Fr. Ripperger's book on Amazon can do the same thing.

2 in reference to the house of satan, Our Lord references the fact that one cannot enter into the house of the strong man and rob him of goods unless he first binds him, and then shall he plunder his house.

This is a parable. It isn't something to take literally. I believe the "strong man" in this parable is traditionally interpreted to be Our Lord Himself, not the aforementioned Aunt Tillie. If we're going to start drawing all kinds of conclusions from parables, does this mean it's okay to steal because Our Lord praised the stealing of the unjust steward?

3 in the book of the Apocalypse, reference is made to Christ taking hold of the dragon, the old serpent which is Satan, and binding him for a thousand years."

A mysterious passage in the Apocalypse proves nothing. And this is Christ binding the demon, not Aunt Tillie.

Ripperger continues..

"Second, The Binding of demons is also mentioned within the rituals of the Church throughout history..."

Where? In exorcism ceremonies? The ones done by priests, with the permission of their ordinary? You mean those ceremonies?

Some of us can't handle an increase in demonic retaliation. Fr Ripperger acknowledges that. If someone is scared of demons, they perhaps don't have strong confidence in Our Lady's protection. Some struggle to stay in a state of grace. Could be many reasons. But Fr is very adamant in recommending we consult a spiritual director before upping our game with these prayers.

Myself, I say "bring it on Mr Devil. Screw you. I can't make you do anything. I can't stop you from messing with me. But those two standing behind me that I have confidence in can send you packing"

Anyhow, in my opinion Dominion is the best resource I have ever come across to up my game in the practice of Catholicism. It's what I needed.

Pax

While I commend your zeal for spiritual advancement, the way to advance in holiness is by reading books on the spiritual life such as The Imitation of Christ, the Introduction to the Devout Life, The Great Means of Salvation and of Perfection by St. Alphonsus, The Liturgical Year, the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius, and similar books, preferably written by saints, and putting their teachings into practice.

Taunting demons is not part of Catholic spirituality.

All read and noted.  Emile, I think your questions can be answered after I see what Ripperger says.

Thank you for being willing to try to find the answers to the points raised, HA. I appreciate your honesty and civility.

I also wanted to add a point to what has been raised thus far:

In the last 170+ years our Lady has made numerous appearances warning us about what was and is happening. In all those appearances she warns but also encourages us by telling us that, even though we have to live through some terrible times, she is with us and we can, and even must, cling to her.
In those apparitions she repeatedly tells us to pray the Rosary.
She also encourages devotion to her Immaculate Conception and to her Immaculate Heart.
Also she instructs us to do our duties in life.
But nowhere can I find her even hinting at the form of binding-prayers taught by Fr. R. As she is the best of Mothers, I just can't see her neglecting to tell us something this important. 

The "strong man" in Matthew 12:29 refers to the enemy, NOT to Our Lord.

one cannot enter into the house of the strong man and rob him of goods unless he first binds him

Thank you, yes, you are correct, but still, the one binding him is Our Lord, not a lay person, which was my main point.