ULTRAMONTANISM, the name given to a certain school of opinion in the Roman Catholic Church (Lat. ultra, beyond, montes, the mountains). The expression ultramontane was origi nally no more than a term of locality, characterizing the persons so described as living—or derived from—"beyond the mountains"; but from the very beginning we find it used as a party appellation to describe those who looked "beyond the mountains" in order to obtain a lead from Rome, who represented the papal point of view and supported the papal policy. Thus, as early as the iith century, the partisans of Gregory VII. were styled ultramontanes, and from the I 5th century onwards the same name was given to the opponents of the Gallican movement in France.
It was not until the 19th century that "ultramontane" and "ultramontanism" came into general use as broad designations covering the characteristics of particular personalities, measures and phenomena within the Roman Catholic Church. At the present time they are applied to a tendency representing a definite form of Catholicism within that Church ; and this tendency, in spite of the individual forms it has assumed in different countries, everywhere displays the same essential features and pursues the same ends. It follows, from the very nature of Ultramontanism, and from the important position to which it has attained, that the official organs of the Church and all the people interested in the continuance of the actual state of affairs deny that it exists at all as an independent tendency. It is indisputably legitimate to speak of Ultramontanism as a distinct policy, but it is very diffi cult to define its essential character.
(i.) The first and fundamental characteristic of Ultramon tanism is its carrying to a logical issue the concentration of all ecclesiastical power in the person of the Roman Pontiff. (See PAPACY.) To the curial system, so evolved, continually fortifying its position in the domains of theology, ecclesiastical law, and politics, the episcopal system stands in opposition. The system admits that the pope represents the unity of the Church, and ac knowledges his primacy, while at the same time it claims on behalf of the bishops that, in virtue of the divine ordinance, they possess an inalienable right to a share in the government of the Church (see CHURCH HISTORY ; FEBRONIANISM). The struggle between these two systems continued well into the i9th century; and, though episcopalism was not infrequently proscribed by the Curia, it still survived, and till the year 187o could boast that no oecu menical council had ventured to condemn it. This was done for
the first time, in 187o, at the Vatican Council (q.v.), whose de crees, recognizing the universal episcopate and the infallibility of the pope, marked the triumph of that doctrine by which they had been long anticipated. The Catholic Church, in all countries, has become more and more dependent on the Curia : the bishops have lost their autonomous standing, and their position is little more than that of papal delegates, while all important questions are referred to Rome or settled by the nuncios.
(ii.) A second peculiarity of Ultramontanism is that it claims for the Catholic Church the functions of a political power, and asserts that it is the duty of the secular state to carry out its in structions and wishes. Since the conditions of the age no longer allow the pope to depose a temporal sovereign, the practical application of this conception of the relationship between the spiritual and temporal powers has taken other forms, all of which, however, clearly show that the superiority of the Church over the State is assumed. This may be seen in the attitude of Ultra montanism towards secular law. It assumes that God has con ferred on the individual and on society certain rights and corn petences as inalienable possessions. This "natural law" ranks above all secular law, and all state legislation is binding only in so far as it is in harmony with that law. As to the provisions of this natural law, and the consequences they entail in individual cases, these can be decided only by the Church, i.e., in the last resort, by the pope. Thus, even at the present time, the opinion is very clearly expressed in Ultramontane quarters that, in the event of the state issuing laws contravening those of nature or of the Church, obedience must be refused. The attitude of Ultra montanism, for instance, towards the right claimed and exercised by the state to make laws concerning marriage is wholly negative; it recognizes no marriage laws except those of the Church, the Church alone being regarded as competent to decide what impedi ments are a bar to marriage, and to exercise jurisdiction over such cases.