Feyerabend on empiricism and sola scriptura

Hmm, if this blog article is accurate then Feyerabend's analogy to sola scriptura appears to be a strawman. "Sola scriptura" was never a claim that nothing helps you interpret scripture -- its advocates all claim that this is the role of the spirit. There's an odd paragraph towards the end of Feser's blog post:

"But you can ask such questions of an authoritative interpreter who stands outside the texts. And such an interpreter -- in the form of an institutional Church -- is exactly what the Catholic position posits."

That prompts the rather obvious retort "authoritative interpreter who stands outside the text ... I wonder who all these God-believing protestants could possibly think that might be..."

This seems obvious enough that surely Feyerabend would have recognised it, so perhaps Feser's summary of Feyerabend is flawed?

Possibly related simultaneous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10328699

Heidegger's Being and Time provides a similar critique of modern empiricism. He argued that our most fundamental knowledge of objects comes from our history and potential future with them. When we know "There is an apple", the self embedded in time (Dasein) provides the "There is".