It is not evident what the authors of this canon meant by the term patrocinium. It seems that some defiant clerics had powerful patrons, possibly members of their own family. It is plausible to imagine some noble-born clerics being reluctant to carry out daily clerical duties. Another interpretation suggests that the clerics mentioned in this canon were unable to perform their work in the church they were assigned to because they served in the private lay foundations. In this case, it would be quite natural to strip them of their canonical salary. This explanation also clarifies why only this kind of punishment was introduced (with no mention of the usual disciplining methods: excommunication, demotion, or suspension).