Who Really Was That Servant? (Matthew 24:45-47; Luke 12:39-48)
Here is an interesting record of how the identity of 'That Servant' first came to be connected with the WTS. Please note Russell's initial view that the Watch Tower could function as "That Servant". At the bottom of the page I've written some quotations from the writings of some early professed Christians to show another view of the identity of "That Servant".
__________
The excitement connected with the conspiracy against me [Charles Russell] above referred to temporarily hindered the sprouting of the bad seed of so-called "woman's rights" and ambition, and temporarily Mrs. Russell became very enthusiastic in my support. It was she who first called attention to Matt. 24:45-47, applying it to me in a meeting at Allegheny and subsequently in another meeting with the New York church. I demurred that I had not thought of the passage thus, and declined to make any personal application of it, although I could not deny the force of the argument that it pointed out "that servant," and "fellow servants" and "the household," apparently clearly and designedly distinguishing between these terms. Some little objection was aroused by her interpretation and I urged great moderation in the making of any personal application, suggesting that the WATCH TOWER rather than its editor might be considered "that servant." As an evidence of Mrs. Russell's position on the question, I give a copy of a letter she wrote in defense of her statement of the matter before the New York church, as follows:---
Allegheny, Pa., Dec. 31, 1895.
Mr. Geo D. Woolsey,
Dear Brother in Christ:--- Husband has shown me your kind letter of Dec. 18, the spirit of which was much appreciated by both of us. I am glad to note your frankly stated opinion as to the interpretation of Matt. 24:45-51, and I have carefully examined the arguments and Scriptures you have set forth. Thinking you will be glad to know *how I view the Scriptures you mention*, I will proceed to tell you I fully agree with the interpretation of Isaiah 52:7, presented in the TOWER of Oct., 1881, which you endorse, the one in that case being the Christ, Head and body, of which the living members constitute "the feet."
I also agree that Rev. 16:15 refers to any one of the church who complies with the conditions. The entire statement gives evidence to this effect. It could not be understood otherwise. I also agree that in the parables of the talents and pounds, as in all parables, the thing said is not the thing meant, and that each one here mentioned, as in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, represents a class.
But when we come to Matt. 24:45-51 it appears to me to be a totally different case. Here are brought to our attention---"that servant," "his fellow servants" and "the household." Now, if the Lord wished to indicate a chief servant of the truth, and fellow servants assisting in serving the meat in due season to the household of faith, he could not have chosen more precise language to convey such a thought. And, on the contrary, to ignore such an order and reasonableness in the account, to my mind throws the entire narrative into confusion, making the "servants" (plural) and "that servant" interchangeable terms.
If we should handle all Scriptures thus loosely, it seems to me we could either prove or disprove anything according to our preconceived ideas. It does not seem to me reasonable, nor a justifiable interpretation of our Lord's testimony, to say that the entire household fed itself, and that the Lord gave the meat in season to all together without using any of the number as his agents or servants in the distribution. And if it be conceded that there is a difference between "the household" and "the servants" who minister the meat in due season to the household, then it cannot be denied that our Lord's words also point out one of those servants as specially intrusted with the meat in season and used in dispensing it to the fellow servants and the household in general.
I notice that you do not analyze the text as I do. If you see any way for making these three expressions viz., "that servant," "his fellow servants" and "the household," all mean the same thing without making nonsense out of the entire statement, I hope you will favor me by pointing out how it can be done.
It seems to me, further, that the interpretation which I suggest is the one, and the only one, which corresponds to the fulfillment. We agree in the belief that the Lord is now present, that he assumed his office of King in 1878, and that since that time his household has been richly fed with meat in due season. It seems to me that in dispensing the food to the household the Lord has not given it personally to each member, but from among them he has chosen and used a number of servants, and that all of these servants have been supplied with the meat in due season through *one* particular servant---"that servant." So, both from the construction of the Lord's language and from the facts before us which constitute their fulfillment at the time indicated, viz., in these days of his presence, I can, so far, reach no other conclusions than those I have stated.
However, my object in writing is not to urge my convictions upon you. I merely state them for your consideration, believing you will be interested in examining them, and that you will agree with me that whatever God has expressed in his Word is worthy of our most careful consideration, and is for our instruction and profiting.
With the greetings of the season, in which Bro. Russell joins, Your Sister in Christ,
MARIA F. RUSSELL.
[Watch. 1906 Jul 15; extracts from page 215; emphasis mine]
__________
Notes:
The parable of "that servant" is also found at Luke 12:39-48 where a little more detail is given. Below are some quotes from early so-called 'Church Fathers', which suggest that at least some early professed Christians believed "that servant" to represent elders/overseers in the various congregations.
"Such presbyters [elders] does the Church nourish, of whom also the prophet says [Isaiah 60:17]: 'I will give thy rulers [Hebrew = pequddah (administrators)] in peace, and thy bishops [Hebrew = nagas (overseers)] in righteousness.' Of whom also did the Lord declare [Matthew 24:45, 46], 'Who then shall be a faithful steward (actor), whom the Lord sets over His household, to give them their meat in due season? Blessed is that servant whom his Lord, when He cometh, shall find so doing.' Paul then, teaching us where one may find such, says [1 Corinthians 12:28], 'God hath placed in the Church, first, apostles; secondly, prophets; thirdly teachers.'" - Irenaeus Against Heresies (Book 4, chapter 26, paragraph 5)
"Now the more any one sees the bishop [overseer] keeping silence, the more ought he to revere him. For we ought to receive every one whom the Master of the house sends to be over His household, as we would do Him that sent him." - Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians (Chapter 6, first part of paragraph 1, shorter version)
"When therefore, Peter asked whether He had spoken the parable [Luke 12:41-46] 'unto them, or even to all,' He sets forth for them, and for all who should bear rule [compare with 1 Timothy 5:17; Hebrews 13:17] in the churches, the similitude of stewards. That steward who should treat his fellow-servants well in his lord's absence, would on his return be set as ruler over all his property; but he who should act otherwise should be severed, and have his portion with the unbelievers, when his lord should return on the day when he looked not for him, at the hour when he was not aware - even that Son of man, the Creator's Christ, not a thief, but a Judge." - Tertullian Against Marcion (Book 4, chapter 29)