Coined by Pierre Bourdieu, who took his cue from the Weberian idea of theodicy, the concept of sociodicy is not as renowned, in French and international sociology, as other bourdieusian notions such as “field”, “capital” or “habitus”. It refers to the efforts undertaken by the dominaters to justify the social world as it is, meaning, most often, to their own advantage. The philosophical and sociological (Leibniz, Weber) lineage of the term conveys a close connection to the question of religions and creed. Yet the use of the notion in field theory (where it is often tied to the ruling class) tallies with an attempt to secularise it. After briefly retracing the origins of the concept, my contribution intends to draw on both historical and contemporary work and findings to explain how sociodicy can be used in empirical research and serve to highlight the social domination elites exert. The first study that will fuel my presentation is a prosopography of the exponents of the idea of public service in France from 1870 until 1940. It involves elites within the State (high civil servants, law professors, academics, MPs) that handled public service as an alternative and updated ideology to fit with the new regime of the Third Republic and thus avoid joining “the graveyard of aristocracies” (Pareto). The second inquiry I shall rely on foregrounds a professional and top-earning elite: corporate lawyers in large law firms established in France and in the United States, making a lot of money while doing pro bono work. Although they differ in time and space, these two examples of sociodicy not only resonate with the Weberian idea of “serve and rule”; they also pinpoint the elites endeavour to dictate what social change means and redirect those changes that are likely to undermine their prestige and positions.