Friday, April 29<\/b><\/p>\n
1 Peter 4:1-11: Once gain the Apostle turns to the theme of Christ\u2019s sufferings (cf. 2:21-24; 3:18) in order to draw out the practical implications of the Cross in the life of Christians (verse 1). Considering the Passion of Christ, believers are to arm themselves (hoplisasthe<\/i> with \u201cthe same way thinking\u201d (ennoian<\/i>). That is to say, they are to take the remembrance of Christ\u2019s sufferings as the guide to their thoughts and sentiments.<\/p>\n
The Apostle Paul taught the same thing: \u201cLet this mind be in you (touto phroneite<\/i>) which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross\u201d (Philippians 2:5-8).<\/p>\n
Such a one, first of all gives up the life of sin (verses 2-4). Otherwise he betrays the Cross, which paid the price of those sins. Similarly, the Apostle Paul wrote to the Romans: \u201cHow shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin\u201d (Romans 6:2-6).<\/p>\n
Ezekiel 14: In verses 1-11, the elders who came to consult Ezekiel got more than they anticipated, because the prophet was given insight into the deeper idolatry of their hearts. These men were apparently looking for some prediction about the future, only to be told that God\u2019s prophetic word is not truly available for the unrepentant. That is to say, the prophet\u2019s task is not to satisfy human curiosity about future events, but to call sinners to the due consideration of their souls. To borrow a concise expression from Saint Augustine, the prophet\u2019s task is often that of prescribing, not predicting: praecipientis videlicet, non praedicentis modo<\/i>—The City of God<\/i>15.7).<\/p>\n
Thus, instead of responding to their query about the future, Ezekiel summons these men to look inside themselves, at the idolatry in their hearts, before it is too late.<\/p>\n
The second oracle in this chapter (verses 12-23) insists that the whole society, if it is unfaithful to God, will be punished as a whole. The Lord will not spare any society simply for the sake of a few just men in it, even if these latter include the likes of Noah, Daniel, and Job. While the just individuals themselves will be respected, this will have no affect on the lot of the whole, because God is fair and will render to each man according to his deserts.<\/p>\n
Before God\u2019s throne of judgment, therefore, it will not matter \u201cwho you know.\u201d This thesis, which will be repeated throughout the Book of Ezekiel, is identical to that in the Book of Jeremiah (for instance, 15:1-4), and is a great deal tougher than we find, for instance, in Genesis 18, where it appears that the presence of five just men would have spared the destruction of Sodom.<\/p>\n
Saturday, April 30<\/b><\/p>\n
1 Peter 4:12-19: Outside of the Acts of the Apostles, this section contains the only place in the New Testament where we find the word \u201cChristian\u201d: \u201cYet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed\u201d (verse 16).<\/p>\n
Two observations may be made in regard to Peter\u2019s use of the term \u201cChristian\u201d here.<\/p>\n
First, Peter himself had been active in the founding of the Church at Antioch, where this term was first used (Acts 11:26; Galatians 2:11). It was from Antiochian usage that he adopted the term.<\/p>\n
Second, it is significant that this name \u201cChristian,\u201d first used by non-Christians to describe the new group at Antioch, tended to be used in the context of persecution, as is clearly the case here in 1 Peter (verses 14-16). This context is identical to that of the only other place where we find the word \u201cChristian,\u201d the trial of Paul before Agrippa (where it is also heard from the lips of a non-Christian: \u201cThen Agrippa said to Paul, \u2018You almost persuade me to become a Christian\u2019\u201d (Acts 26:28).<\/p>\n
It is useful for Christians to bear in mind, when they call themselves by this name, that original context of enmity and even persecution. Indeed, there is good reason to believe that the name was first used by those who actually hated Christians. Consequently, it should not surprise us if even today the word is used as an epithet of contempt, as is fairly often the case in the secular media and some political discourse.<\/p>\n
Ezekiel 15: This parable of the vine wood is more reflective than ecstatic, more analytical and rational than poetic; it conveys the studious, logical aspect of Ezekiel\u2019s thought.<\/p>\n
And the message of this parable could hardly be more straightforward or less complicated: Vines and their stocks are of no constructive use unless they are still in the process of growing grapes. Once they have stopped doing that, they are useless for any constructive purpose. Unlike other kinds of wood, vine wood cannot be used to fashion homes or furniture or even basic tools. Indeed, one cannot employ such wood to make an instrument so elementary as a wall peg on which to hang a pot in the kitchen. (The partial burn damage in verse 5 alludes to the partial exile of Jerusalem\u2019s citizens in 597, some five years earlier.)<\/p>\n
However, the parable proceeds to say, this wood can still be burned! No matter how otherwise useless, it still makes decent fuel. So, says the Lord, let Jerusalem take heed, because He has not seen any fruit on that vine for many a year.<\/p>\n
The motif of this parable should put one in mind of Jesus\u2019 cursing of the barren fig tree in the gospels of Matthew and Mark. Both Ezekiel\u2019s parable and Jesus\u2019 parabolic action had to do with impending destructions of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n
Inasmuch as Jerusalem is also a mystic symbol of the soul, the moral sense of this parable is applicable to us all on a daily basis. It is the other side of the Gospel injunction that we are to live lives that bear fruit; otherwise we are useless to God for any constructive purpose.<\/p>\n
Sunday, May 1<\/b><\/p>\n
2 John 1-13: It is a common feature on letters, whenever written, that they normally contain the names of the writer and the recipient. This is as true our own correspondence today as it was of the epistles of St. Paul. In this present work, however, the author identifies neither himself nor his readers. We should say something about both of these points.<\/p>\n
The writer self-identification here is simply \u201cthe old man\u201d (ho presbyteros<\/i>. Apparently the Apostles were sometimes referred to by the generic \u201celder,\u201d or in Greek presbyteros<\/i>. This would explain why the Apostle Peter calls himself by this term (1 Peter 5:1). In the case of the present epistle, however, something more seems to be intended. The author does not call himself an<\/i> elder, but the<\/i> elder, or perhaps even \u201cthe<\/i> Elder,\u201d indicating that this is what he was called; it was the normal way in which folks referred to him, knowing exactly who was meant.<\/p>\n
Abundant anecdotal evidence testifies that there have been many Christian pastors, over the centuries, who have been similarly referenced, such as the Pastor<\/i>. The present writer knows of a cathedral where the expression the<\/i> Dean referred to a clergyman who had been dead for years. None of his less impressive successors, all of them deans, were ever so called!<\/p>\n
Anyway, Papias of Hierapolis, an early second century Christian writing in Asia Minor, refers to someone called ho presbyeros Ioannes<\/i>, \u201cJohn the Elder.\u201d Although Eusebius of Caesarea, who records this witness, doubts that the reference is to St. John the Apostle (Ecclesiastical History 3.39.5-6), the present writer does not trust him on the point. Since the earliest collectors of the writings contained in the New Testament were guided by the canon of \u201capostolicity,\u201d it is difficult to understand how they would have included the present epistle, unless they had been persuaded that John the Apostle wrote it.<\/p>\n
Ezekiel 16: This parable is more elaborate than the one in the previous chapter, showing more evidence of allegorical detail. Both parables convey roughly the same message. Each parable is an illustration of failure. A beautiful but egregiously unfaithful wife is as useless as a cut and dried vine.<\/p>\n
Several of the various details in this account of the harlot refer to specific periods and events in Israel\u2019s history: the origins of the people, the time of the Covenant, the founding of the united kingdom, the prosperity of the Solomonic era, and the division into two kingdoms.<\/p>\n
The oracle\u2019s final part prepares the listeners for Jerusalem\u2019s impending doom, which is to be like the earlier total destructions of Sodom and Samaria. Jerusalem, says the Lord, is more evil than either of these.<\/p>\n
At the very end, however—after Jerusalem has fallen—appears a message of hope and renewal. Even the prophets most pessimistic about Jerusalem at this time, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, never cease to trust in God\u2019s ultimate mercy. In particular, God will not hold children responsible for the sins of their parents, a theme to be elaborated in Chapter 18.<\/p>\n
Monday, May 2<\/b><\/p>\n
1 Corinthians 15.1-15: The permanence of the soul, its continued life after death, was not in contention among the early Christians. Indeed, thanks in part to Plato, some form of belief in a spiritual afterlife was quite in fashion in the Greco-Roman culture where the Apostles proclaimed the Gospel.<\/p>\n
The Apostle Paul, for his part, certainly anticipated an afterlife immediately following death. This persuasion prompted him to \u201cdesire to depart and be with Christ\u201d (Philippians 1:23). This immediate afterlife was not, however, the true goal of Paul\u2019s striving, which was to \u201cattain to the resurrection from the dead\u201d (3:11). Anyway, no early Christians\u2014as far as we can tell\u2014contested the expectation of an immediate afterlife.<\/p>\n
When the Apostles proclaimed Jesus as risen, however, they did not mean that he had somehow survived in a spiritual state after his death on the Cross. They meant, quite plainly, \u201che rose again the third day according to the Scriptures\u201d (1 Corinthians 15:4). It was an event, not a static condition.<\/p>\n
Also, it was emphatically physical, not in the sense of induced by physical forces, but in the sense that it happened to the body. Had this not been the case, the Resurrection of Jesus would not have happened according to the Scriptures. The Resurrection-hope held out by Holy Scripture had to do with the body. When Isaiah prophesied, \u201cYour dead shall live,\u201d he went on to specify, \u201ctheir corpses will arise\u201d (Isaiah 26:19).<\/p>\n
It was this physical quality of the Christian hope that proved to be too challenging for some of the brethren at Corinth. They summarized their argument with the sarcastic query. \u201cHow are the dead raised up? And with what body do they come?\u201d (1 Corinthians 15:35)<\/p>\n
Ezekiel 17: This allegorical riddle is concerned with the geopolitical maneuvering dominant in the royal court at Jerusalem during the period between 597 and 586 B.C.<\/p>\n
The first eagle in the riddle is the Emperor Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon (604-562); the second is Pharaoh Psammetichus II of Egypt (595-589). Sitting at either end of the Fertile Crescent, both Babylon and Egypt sought to make their military, economic, and political power felt throughout the region, and each of these two great centers had its friends and confederates within the Jerusalem court.<\/p>\n
The removed branch in the allegory is King Jehoiakin of Judah, deposed from his throne in 597 and transported to Babylon. The new seed in the allegory is King Zedekiah, who replaced Jehoiakin and served as a vassal of Babylon. Because of the many machinations in his court, Zedekiah\u2019s foreign policy was marked by vacillation and instability. Unable to maintain his covenant with God, he was likewise unable to maintain his vassal covenant with Babylon. The one infidelity led to the other (verses 11-19).<\/p>\n
Even though he was thriving under Babylonian suzerainty, the allegory goes on to say, Zedekiah endeavored to forsake his political obligations to the authority at the western end of the Fertile Crescent, and began to cultivate friendship with the eastern end, Egypt. Now he must pay for it. His sin consisted in seeking a purely political solution for a mainly spiritual and moral problem.<\/p>\n
This oracle ends, nonetheless, on a note of future hope for the house of David, a hope that the Christian knows is fulfilled in great David\u2019s greater Son.<\/p>\n
Tuesday, May 3<\/b><\/p>\n
1 Corinthians 15.12-19: What the Corinthians skeptics contested was not a belief in an afterlife, but the physical cosmology implicitly contained in the thesis, \u201cthe God of our fathers raised up Jesus\u201d (Acts 5:30). They were unable to grasp that the Gospel proclaimed this truth as a vindication of the whole created order.<\/p>\n
Holy Scripture, after all, had not declared, \u201cGod approved of all the spiritual things He had made,\u201d but, \u201cGod saw everything<\/i> (kol<\/i>) that he had formed, and indeed it was very good.\u201d (Genesis 1:31).<\/p>\n
It was in refuting the skeptics at Corinth that the Apostle Paul came to understand the Resurrection of Christ as God\u2019s historical act for the purpose of rectifying the evils inflicted on the created order by Adam\u2019s Fall. The Resurrection had to be physical, because death and corruption were physical.<\/p>\n
Although it was a single event in history, the \u201clogic\u201d of the Resurrection implied that the whole physical world, starting with the bodies of Christians, was destined for restoration and transformation through the risen and glorified flesh of Christ. This meant that the true and ultimate afterlife anticipated by Christians was not based on the immortality of the soul, but on the resurrection of the body.<\/p>\n
In answering the Corinthian skepticism, Paul established the \u201clogic\u201d of the Resurrection in a chain of short hypothetical syllogisms. Within 1 Corinthians 15:12-19, the word \u201cif\u201d appears nine times, leading to the final inference, \u201cIf in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.\u201d<\/p>\n
Ezekiel 18: This is an oracle about personal responsibility, a matter on which the mind of Ezekiel may be contrasted with modern sensibilities. Modern ideas of individual moral responsibility often run along such lines as, \u201cYou must not do anything you can\u2019t live with.\u201d According to this perspective, moral norms are established by the limits of a person\u2019s psychological comfort; what is evil or good is determined by whether or not a person can endure having done it.<\/p>\n
Ezekiel knows nothing of such nonsense. For him personal moral responsibility means that a man must ultimately be responsible, not to the dubious dispositions of his own conscience, but to the all-righteous God who gave the law.<\/p>\n
Each man must respond for himself, however, not for either his ancestors or his progeny. The people at Jerusalem needed to hear such a message, because some of them contended that they were being punished\u2014with doubtful justice!—for the sins of their fathers. Ezekiel was charged to set them straight on this matter.<\/p>\n
Although the social and even psychological effects of sin are handed down from one generation to the next, the moral burden of sin is not. Each man will answer for himself and his own moral decisions, not for those of his grandparents. The retributive principle is always: \u201cThe soul that sins shall die.\u201d<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, the possibility of moral change remains for each of us as long as we are alive. A bad man can become good, and a good man can become bad. Our moral fate depends on what we become, not on what we were before.<\/p>\n
The closing part of this oracle stands as a strong witness against any religious theory claiming that God is glorified even by someone\u2019s eternal loss. No, eternal loss is a pure waste of proffered salvation. God is not glorified by anyone\u2019s
\ngoing to hell.<\/p>\n
Wednesday, May 4<\/b><\/p>\n
1 Corinthians 15.20-28: At this point, Paul is ready to move from apologetics to theology, and he marks the transition with a formal \u201cnow\u201d: \u201cBut now Christ is risen from the dead and has become the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep\u201d (15:20).<\/p>\n
To speak theologically means to address truth through the categories, the images, the questions, and the declarations of Holy Scripture. The Resurrection of Christ was not just a bare fact. It was a theological revelation. It happened \u201caccording to the Scriptures.\u201d Because this was so, Paul consulted Holy Scripture, in order to grasp what the Resurrection meant.<\/p>\n
It is most significant that the first Scripture he consulted on this matter was Genesis. Whereas St. Peter consulted the Book of Psalms for this purpose (Acts 2:24-36), Paul went back to one of the earliest episodes of biblical history, the account of the Fall: \u201cFor since death came through a man, through a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive\u201d (1 Corinthians 15:21-22).<\/p>\n
Ezekiel 19: This passage is a “lamentation” (verses 1,14), descriptive of Jerusalem\u2019s recent history, in a tripartite allegory. The lioness, Judah, gave birth to two kings–the two lions–whose stories are told in the first two parts of this allegory.<\/p>\n
The first king (verses 3-4) is Jehoahaz, who took the throne when the great Josiah was killed in 609 at the Battle of Megiddo. His very short reign (only two verses here) came to an end that same year, because he was deposed by Pharaoh Neco and taken in bondage to Egypt (2 Kings 23:31-34).<\/p>\n
The second king (verses 5-9) is Jehoiakin, deposed by the Babylonians in 597 after an unsuccessful rebellion on his part, and carried away to exile in Babylon, along with the cream of Judah\u2019s leadership, a group including Ezekiel himself (2 Kings 24:8-16).<\/p>\n
At the time of this oracle, both of these deposed “lions” are still alive–one in Egypt, the other in Babylon—but they are impotent to help their mother, Judah. This mother is then portrayed as a vine in the third and final section of the oracle (verses 10-14), which describes the devastation attendant on the inept and irresponsible government of Judah\u2019s last king, Zedekiah.<\/p>\n
Thursday, May 5<\/b><\/p>\n
Ezekiel 20: This oracle, delivered on August 14, 591 B.C., was occasioned by an inquiry made to Ezekiel by a group of exiled Jewish elders, apparently undeterred by their earlier failure in 14:1-11.<\/p>\n
So Ezekiel answers them: Beginning with Israel\u2019s ancient sojourn in Egypt, prior to the Exodus, idolatry has been an abiding sin of God\u2019s Chosen People. That rebellion against the Lord in Egypt was simply continued during the people\u2019s wandering in the desert of Sinai. During both of those periods God spared His people, so that their enemies (and His) might not take comfort from their destruction.<\/p>\n
Indeed, because Israel constantly violated the Lord\u2019s ordinances, these ordinances proved not to be good for them, inasmuch as the very disobedience rendered the people morally worse (verses 23-26). (This is a motif, of course, that St. Paul will later develop in his Epistles: the futility of the Law to bring about salvation.) Then, even after their settlement in the Promised Land, the people continued their ancient infidelities.<\/p>\n
Now, after all this, do these elders dare to come and “inquire of the Lord”? They are told that this inquiry amounts to a mockery. They have always known God\u2019s will, yet they have decided to disobey it. Why should the Lord have anything further to say to them? (We should particularly observe here that, among the sins of Israel specifically named, child sacrifice is very prominent. Since the murder of unborn children is one of the most serious offenses of our own society, this oracle seems especially relevant today.)<\/p>\n
Even after conveying this oracle, however, Ezekiel goes on in verses 32 to 44 to deliver a prophecy of Israel\u2019s eventual restoration. Although Israel\u2019s kings have brought the nation low, God is still Israel\u2019s true king (20:33).<\/p>\n
Psalms 9 & 10: The text of these psalms is notoriously spoiled, but it is clear that this was originally an \u201calphabetical\u201d psalm—that is to say, a psalm in which each verse began with a letter of the Hebrew alphabet in immediate succession. Consequently, we also know that this was originally a single psalm (as in the canonical Greek text of the Church), not two different psalms (as in the traditional Masoretic Hebrew text and the modern translations based thereon).<\/p>\n
It begins, \u201cI will praise You, O Lord, with my whole heart.\u201d The key to the proper praying of the psalms is purity of heart. Psalmody involves prayer from one\u2019s central core, a heart characterized by wholeness. In Psalm 100 we will say to the Lord: \u201cI will sing, and I will understand in the blameless path.\u201d To pray with understanding in the deeper spirit of the psalms requires walking \u201cthe blameless path,\u201d living with an undivided heart. To give oneself over to psalmody as the skeletal frame of the life of prayer, therefore, is inseparable from the life of sustained spiritual effort to purify one\u2019s heart. All prayer is a struggle to see God, after all, and we have it on very strong authority that only the pure of heart will see God.<\/p>\n
Friday, May 6<\/b><\/p>\n
1 Corinthians 15.35-49: Paul goes beyond the mere unbelief of the Corinthian skeptics. He was pushing the question of the resurrection in a new direction, for the purpose of clarifying it. The skeptic, who pretends to dismiss the resurrection by asking what sort of body the dead rise in, is a fool, says Paul, because he contradicted the sovereign power of the Creator: \u201cGod gives a body as He pleases\u201d (15:38). To deny God\u2019s ability to raise the dead is to affirm that death lies beyond the reach of God\u2019s power. This is an irrational, or foolish, claim.<\/p>\n
Jesus, we recall, argued the same case when the Sadducees questioned him about the woman who had been married seven times. They, too, had raised a hypothetical objection to the resurrection: \u201cNow there were seven brothers. . . . Therefore, in the resurrection, when they rise, whose wife will she be? For all seven had her as wife\u201d (Mark 12:18-23). In answering the Sadducees, Jesus put his finger on the lack of logic in their denial. It was based in part, he said, on their unfamiliarity with \u201cthe power of God\u201d (12:24; cf. Acts 23:7).<\/p>\n
Ezekiel 21: The deep, very personal lamentation in this text will remind the reader of Ezekiel\u2019s older contemporary, Jeremiah, who expressed very much the same sentiments during that decade immediately preceding the fall of Jerusalem in 586.<\/p>\n
There are four oracles in this chapter (the first oracle actually beginning in 20:45), three of them against Jerusalem, and the fourth against the Ammonite capital of Rabbah (the present city Amman, capital of the modern country of Jordan). Even as Ezekiel speaks, the Babylonian army, with its “well polished sword,” is already on the march toward those two cities.<\/p>\n
The imagery alternates between fire (particularly a forest fire, with Jerusalem being the timber) and sword, both images combined in that of the lightning.<\/p>\n
The references to the “Negev” in the first oracle (20:45\u201421:7) should be understood simply as “the south,” which is often the case in Ezekiel. The invading army, marching from Babylon, did not go directly westward toward Jerusalem, a march through the Arabian Desert being quite prohibitive. Instead, it marched up and around the Fertile Crescent, following the course of the Mesopotamian and Syrian rivers, so that now it has turned southward, in the direction of the Negev Desert, tramping toward Jerusalem and Rabbah.<\/p>\n
In the second oracle (verses 8-17) Ezekiel addresses the Babylonian sword itself, which is the instrument of God\u2019s vindication. The Babylonians, though they are acting as God\u2019s instrument in history, do not know this, no more than a sword recognizes who wields it.<\/p>\n
The third oracle (verses 18-27), continuing the image of the Babylonian sword, portrays another of Ezekiel\u2019s symbolic actions, which must be explained to those who witness it. It pantomimes a fork in the road; which city, Jerusalem or Rabbah, will Nebuchadnezzar strike first?<\/p>\n
The final oracle (verses 28-32) addresses to Rabbah the same threats that have been spoken to Jerusalem.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Friday, April 29 1 Peter 4:1-11: Once gain the Apostle turns to the theme of Christ\u2019s sufferings (cf. 2:21-24; 3:18) in order to draw out the practical implications of the Cross in the life of Christians (verse 1). Considering the Passion of Christ, believers are to arm themselves (hoplisasthe with \u201cthe same way thinking\u201d (ennoian). … Continue reading April 29 – May 6, 2022<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1851"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1851"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1851\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1852,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1851\/revisions\/1852"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1851"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1851"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1851"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}