I'm probably not the best person to answer this question since I'm not convinced of the Bible's inspired nature. With that caveat, here are my thoughts.
Be careful not to get sucked into JW theological traps. The whole FDS doctrine is a perfect example of this. Just because the WTS interprets this parable a certain way does not mean that settles the matter. Think about it. If the FDS is really a clergy-type class that makes rules for Christians, why did none of the Apostles or Bible writers refer to themselves (or anyone else) as the FDS? Paul had a perfect opportunity when setting out the headship principle (1 Corinthians 11:3). He said that it's God-->Jesus-->man-->woman. Notice the glaring omission of any "FDS" in that equation.
Thus, the FDS likely means something else. Perhaps Jesus was simply referring to Christians who help one another (providing food at the proper time). This would fit in with other scriptures, such as those discussing an "interchange of encouragement," "not forsaking the gathering of ourselves together," and "wherever 2 or 3 are gathered in may name, there I am also."
But what about the "appointment" over "all my belongings"? As you know, the WTS teaches that this occurred in 1919 when Jesus appointed the FDS (theoretically the anointed remnant, but for all practical purposes Rutherford and the WTS) over the "belongings" which include all other JWs. There's practically no scriptural support for this doctrine--the WTS tries to twist the eponymous language of Malachi 3--but it's a real stretch.
I think a more reasonable (and Scriptural, for what it's worth) interpretation of the "appointment" is that when an anointed Christian dies and goes to heaven to rule, Jesus appoints him (along with other heavenly resurrected Christians) over his belongings, such as the earth.
To sum it up: There's no evidence that the early Christians considered the "FDS" to be a set of church leaders. That term is not even used (or hinted at) in the New Testament other than in Matt and Luke where Jesus gave the parables. If this was such a crucial doctrine, wouldn't Paul, Peter, James, John, etc., have mentioned it? To the contrary, this complete absence of the FDS doctrine in the early church strongly indicates that the FDS does not mean what the WTS claims it means.