You may want to be careful to clarify what character of authority you understand Rome as having and the kind of submission required, which others define more strongly (like Boniface VIII), but the issue remains that your claim is that "No one has given you authority to interpret scripture," and thus the basis for your claim is an issue.
And thus my question "is your position that that unless one has the sanction of those who are the instruments and stewards of Scripture and Divine revelation, having historical descent, then they have no authority?
You allow for a derived degree of authority among the EOs, but this is by Rome's sanction, thus i see no difference.
Anyone who has received genuine baptism has received spiritual gifts and therefore some measure of authority and graces to resist the evil one. Anyone who is a parent or who has been entrusted by a parent with the care of a child has a measure of authority, including authority to give religious instruction to the best of one’s ability and consistent with natural law. Indeed, any of us if mature and of sound mind has a certain authority over himself and thus is a moral agent accountable for his actions. But authority to teach the Christian faith, including the interpretation of Scripture, is entrusted to the apostles and their successors, and those ordained or otherwise sent by them. That authority is not shared by, for example, protestants or Jews. This does not mean protests and Jews can’t or shouldn’t read Scripture profitably; it does mean they are liable to make many errors in doing so and therefore are of limited reliability.
The authority of the EOs does not derive from Rome’s sanction but by virtue of their membership in true local churches descending from apostolic foundation, which have maintained continuity of sacraments and ordained hierarchy. They do not require authentication from Rome to be “real”, but their refusal to recognize the petrine ministry impedes their complete communion with those who do.