Pesachim 82 a, b

What if the Paschal lamb becomes ritually impure and must be burned using wood?  The rabbis discuss the options of burning the lamb in one's own courtyard or in the Temple courtyard.  They consider whether one may only use one's own wood, whether unused wood from the Temple is permitted, and whether wood of a lesser quality can be used for this purpose.  

On a number of occasions, the rabbis argue about whether embarrassment should be part of this process.  Only a miser would use the Temple wood, so we should embarrass him.  A poor person would need the Temple wood, and we should not embarrass him.  A Kohen who is separated from the sacrificial ritual due to ritual impurity should not be made to feel embarrassed.  

The rabbis struggle with the same essential issues that we debate today.  Should we use the positive aspects of "shame" to encourage a certain type of behaviour?  Should we avoid using "shame" to any advantage?  The rabbis seem to believe that shame can be utilized if someone has erred (been miserly) but not if someone has been affected by an externally based status (ritual impurity, poverty).  

Daf (a) ends with a mishna that tells us that if a Paschal lamb has become ritually impure, if it has been removed from the home where it was to be eaten, or if its owners contracted ritual impurity, the lamb must be burned immediately - on the 16th of Nissan.  The Gemara looks to understand why the lamb would be burned and not dealt with in other ways.  Perhaps we are concerned about the blood, which must be burned if it is in the Temple.  Perhaps we are worried about the sanctity of the lamb.  The rabbis attempt to understand when the impurity was discovered, whose impurity was found, and how immediately the disqualification and then the burning were determined.

So many halachot pertaining to one particular sacrifice that had not been performed for generations.  I assume that our Sages were concerned about the continuity of Jewish thought and Jewish rituals given the huge changes taking place.  We think that we are special in coping with Jewish continuity in this age of technology, but we are part of a long tradition of worriers - we vacillate between changing everything in order to engage the Jewish people and desperately grasping onto what we think is ancient, unchanged traditional ritual.  Makes me think of Dan Mendelsohn Aviv's book, End of the Jews: Radical Breaks, Remakes and What Comes Next.  An interesting, informative read about this very topic.