Paul V insisted that they be released to the Church. He demanded the release of the priests as not being amenable to the secular law. When this was refused, the Pope threatened an interdict on account of the property laws and the imprisonment of ecclesiastics, which threat was presented to the Senate on Christmas 1605. The Venetian position was ably defended by a canon lawyer, Paolo Sarpi, who extended the matter to general principles defining separate secular and ecclesiastical spheres. In April 1606 the Pope excommunicated the entire government of Venice and placed an interdict on the city. Father Sarpi strongly advised the Venetian government to refuse to receive the Pope's interdict, and to reason with him while opposing force by force. The Venetian Senate willingly accepted this advice and Fra Paolo presented the case to Paul V, urging from history that the Pope's claim to intermeddle in civil matters was a usurpation; and that in these matters the Republic of Venice recognized no authority but that of God. The rest of the Catholic clergy sided with the city, with the exception of the Jesuits, the Theatines, and the Capuchins. The dissenting clergy were forthwith expelled from Venetian territories. Masses continued to be said in Venice, and the feast of Corpus Christi was celebrated with displays of public pomp and "magnificence", in defiance of the Pope. Within a year (March 1607) the disagreement was mediated by France and Spain. The Most Serene Republic refused to retract the laws, but asserted that Venice would conduct herself "with her "accustomed piety"." The Jesuits, which Venice considered subversive Papal agents, remained banned. No more could be expected. Paul withdrew his censure.