Freemasonry's contributions to Enlightenment.

]Rosicrucian and Masonic Origins

...Then appears that charming "first American gentleman," Dr. Benjamin Franklin, who together with the Marquis de Lafayette, played an important role in this drama of empires. While in France, Dr. Franklin was privileged to receive definite esoteric instruction. It is noteworthy that Franklin was the first in America to reprint Anderson's Constitutions of the Free-Masons, which is a most prized work on the subject, though its accuracy is disputed. Through all this stormy period, these impressive figures come and go, part of a definite organization of political and religious thought—a functioning body of philosophers represented in Spain by no less an individual than Cervantes, in France by Cagliostro and St.-Germain, in Germany by Gichtel and Andreae, in England by Bacon, More, and Raleigh, and in America by Washington and Franklin. Coincident with the Baconian agitation in England, the Fama Fraternitatis and Confessio Fraternitatis appeared in Germany, both of these works being contributions to the establishment of a philosophic government upon the earth. One of the outstanding links between the Rosicrucian Mysteries of the Middle Ages and modern Masonry is Elias Ashmole, the historian of the Order of the Garter and the first Englishman to compile the alchemical writings of the English chemists...

This I believe to be unimportant in content but only the names struck a thought in me.

Yes, in the 1770s abouts many Masons had high political power or good council or were significant in the sciences. I see it as a common trait that the best times of a nation in the more recent world were when Masonry was present, and the worst were when it was absent.

This hypothesis is important because perhaps the real bridge between Russia and the US is not anything but Fraternal...perhaps Freemasonry should be cultivated there in a significant way, such as supporting Masonic Russians to office?

Maybe even covertly such as the Soviets covertly supported communist fronts around the world even largely supported the "hippy" movement in the US. (That's all for debate elsewhere, there's a different point here).

Basically...if the world benefits when the world's leaders are Freemasons, then it should be a goal of nations to establish good council with great men?

I don't believe Freemasonry makes a man so great as say George Washingtion, Elias Ashmole, or Sir Robert Bacon.

But it helps maintain them in an atmosphere where their greatness can be further cultivated?

This should be enough to develop a discussion, for now I must depart. Sorry this is almost just a "half thought" but there's a lot here to expand upon.

[edit on 7-9-2006 by Stratrf_Rus]

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
I don't believe Freemasonry makes a man so great as say George Washingtion, Elias Ashmole, or Sir Robert Bacon.

Freemasonry doesn't make a man great. Such men are already great when they come to Freemasonry. This is a fairly common misconception, that comes up a lot in our conspiracy discussions... it is assumed that Freemasonry contains some secret that changes a man.

What Freemasonry does is provide a forum where men of like mind can come together, but not be hampered by differences in race, color, or creed. Such persons, when they come together, naturally seek out the well-being and happiness of each other... and so everyone is more productive.