I think we humans always face a basic temptation: when faced with something new, do we embrace it as the progress we seek, and that we think will be more fulfilling? Or do we reject that progress?  Our technologies and online lives make that temptation ever present for many of us, I suspect. Should I buy an ipad? An iphone6? Will I be technologized out of existence if I don't have Google Glass?  But many things are that way: fashions, business decisions, political persuasions.

It's not always clear what the best answer is. We might say that Eve choosing the apple was an embrace of the "new" with pretty disastrous consequences - but then, so too was Peter's naming of Jesus as the Christ an embrace of the "new", with a terrific outcome.

I think today's readings offer one way forward in this puzzle.

The first reading (Second John 4-9) is addressed to a “Lady” and her children, which Biblical scholars typically see as referring to a Christian community.  This letter of John’s is concerned with conflict in church teaching: there are those who see themselves as so “progressive” that they deny that Jesus came to earth as a real human being, who want something "newer", progressive, "with the times".  John admonishes the community, though, to hold on to what the apostles have handed down, namely that Jesus is a real human being and through him, we can know God the Father.  In doing so, they will maintain unity with his own community and they will really seek and know Jesus.

The Gospel reading (Luke 17:26-37) shows people who are concerned with the “wrong” kinds of traditions and so miss the importance of Jesus.  They live “buiness as usual”, maybe rejecting what is "new" but even their happy business is full of anger and chaos, because they are so focused on themselves and their own needs.  If we were to look at the original text of Noah and the flood that Jesus mentions here, for instance, we would find that the people in Noah’s time were violent and wicked, according to God (Genesis 6).    Ultimately, Jesus says pretty starkly that our own “traditions” that make reference only to us. Our own individual happiness, without reference to what Jesus might be doing in our lives, won’t be sufficient for having a life with God.

The common feature in both of these is the need to focus on the person of Jesus: there should not be empty tradition without first knowing whether that tradition stands up to the mystery and truth of Jesus. There should likewise not be meaningless “progressiveness” unless it, too, can stand up to the mystery and truth of Jesus.  How can we know which is which?  Jesus suggests that in this life, we may not actually fully know: the vultures will be right there beside the Body of Christ; of two seemingly identical workers, one will be left behind and the other will see Jesus.