Considering the disruption, trauma and pain that so many have suffered as a result of the recent Middle Eastern conflicts, I am a little embarrassed even to mention that they—the increased intensity of Israeli-Palestinian violence along with the U. S. invasion of Iraq—have also dealt a body blow to our Middle East Travel Seminar. But it is true.

Every year for two decades, except for 1991, the year of the Gulf War, METS groups set out for a fantastic three-week journey through Israel and the surrounding Arab countries. Invariably these METS travelers returned with lasting memories, expanded horizons and new friends beyond their usual circles. But we had to cancel the 2002 trip because of the violence in Israel, West Bank and Gaza.

At the time, I thought of it as another temporary pause in the program, comparable to the year of the Gulf War; and I described it as such in the last METS newsletter. By early fall, however, when key members of the METS staff met to plan for 2003, we all agreed that the situation probably would not improve enough, or in time, for a METS trip to Syria, Jordan and Israel even in 2003. But neither could we imagine canceling the program two years in a row. Thus I was encouraged to design an alternative itinerary for 2003—Turkey and Greece.

Who would have predicted at the time that the U. S. would invade Iraq, thus threatening to destabilize the Kurds on Turkey's southeastern frontier, or that we would get into a diplomatic scrape with Turkey about the use of Turkish military bases? All of this happened in February and early March—precisely the time that the nomination-selection process was underway for the METS class of 2003.

So it is not surprising that the METS program was met with less enthusiasm this year than in the past. What is surprising is the pattern of responses. Lay persons usually responded eagerly. If anything, the political uncertainties seemed to increase their curiosity to go to that part of the world for a better understanding of what is going on. Also there were strong responses from three of the seminaries—McAfee, Emmanuel and SBTS. But there were fewer nominations than usual from Candler. Columbia nominated only one student, who later decided to drop out of the program. And there were no nominations this year from Duke.

Bottom line, the METS travel group for 2003 consists of 20 students and 8 lay persons, plus Steve McKenzie and me. We will begin with the usual intense Orientation on May 10, travel as two groups of 15 each, and follow a demanding itinerary that has all of the usual METS ingredients—exotic landscapes, off-the-beaten-track places, unfamiliar cultural traditions, the general unpredictability of travel in the East, sweeping dashes through history, and encounters with religious perspectives different from our own (including perspectives represented in the travel group itself). In a real sense, therefore, this 2003 travel group will be continuing in a tradition that some six hundred previous METS travelers have pioneered and fine-tuned. At the same time they will be blazing a new trail—as much so as the first METS group did in 1980—especially in terms of the unpredictability of travel to off-the-beaten-track places. No former METS group has ever visited Mardin, Urfa and Konya or dozens of other places on this year's itinerary.