It's incredible that the Society would so slavishly avoid the word "servant" (which most other translations use, and which most Christians prefer). In the late 1800s, the president of the LDS church put it this way, and I feel the same way:
I was not born a slave! I cannot, will not be a slave. I would not be a slave to God! I would be His servant, His friend, His son. I would go at His behest; but I would not be His slave. I would rather be extinct than be a slave. His friend I feel I am, and He is mine—a slave! The manacles would pierce my very bones—the clanking chains would grate against my soul—a poor, lost, servile, crawling wretch, to lick the dust and fawn and smile upon the thing who gave the lash! ... But stop! I am God's free man; I will not, cannot be a slave!
The very leadership of the Society refer to themselves, not as the "faithful and wise servant," but the "faithful and discreet slave." In truth, who is the faithful and wise servant? It's the faithful man or woman who is ready to meet the Lord at his coming. Jesus was giving a parable, not a prophecy. He was speaking of his return and he said:
Which of you, then, is a faithful and wise servant, one whom his master will entrust with the care of the household, to give them their food at the appointed time? Blessed is that servant who is found doing this when his lord comes; I promise you, he will give him charge of all his goods. But if that servant plays him false, and says in his heart, My lord is long in coming, and so falls to beating his fellow servants, to eating and drinking with the drunkards, then on some day when he expects nothing, at an hour when he is all unaware, his lord will come, and will cut him off, and assign him his portion with the hypocrites; where there will be weeping, and gnashing of teeth. (Knox Bible)
The parable speaks of two servants, the faithful servant and the unfaithful servant. If you're a Christian, you're the faithful servant. Giving the staff their food and minding the house is the duty of each of us. And as John says, if we are faithful, we will become co-heirs with Christ and inherit all that the Father has. As servants, we're expected to feed and cloth the poor and serve our fellow man. And if we do it to the least of our brethren, it is as if we had done it to the Lord himself.
Had Jesus intended to specify an actual group of people, wouldn't he have said so? For the Lord God will do NOTHING, save he shall reveal his secrets to his servants the prophets. (Amos 3:7) And in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established. To my knowledge, the Governing Body of the Society has NEVER received one revelation, neither have they EVER seen an angel, or God. But the days of prophets has come and gone, they teach. No one receives revelation as the ancient apostles did.
Really? God called Saul/Paul to be a prophet and apostle after Jesus had been resurrected and ascended to Heaven. If he had a revelation and saw God, why can't people today? John had the greatest revelation ever given at around 96 AD. And in his vision he saw that two prophets (his words, not mine) would be called to minister unto the Jews just prior to the coming of Christ. (See Revelation 11) They will prophesy for three and a half years, then be killed and physically resurrected. Will the Governing Body be their seniors, or will they answer to the two prophets? If I were the GB, I'd declare those two prophets to be figurative prophets, not literal. That way, they won't have to stone them; just reject them and render them "invisible."
The Lord has called us his servants, his children, and his friends. But he doesn't call us his slaves, nor does he prophesy in his parables. That means you have to depend on yourselves, not them. If they have no revelation, then they are the blind leading the blind. Thus if you follow them, you both will fall into the pit. So YOU care for the household, feed those who need feeding and be ready for the Master's return when he comes.