Abstract
A fundamental tenet of G. K. Chesterton’s distributism is his Principle of Domesticity, which holds that “the ideal house, the happy family” is a human ideal, and that achieving some approximation to this is a human need. After clarifying what Chesterton means by “home,” I examine his tendency to link home with property, and particularly with the family farm. His argument for this linkage turns on the relationship between farming and the goods of independence and integrity. Drawing on the work of Yves Simon, I show that this relationship is not as tight as Chesterton supposes, and that these goods can be otherwise secured. Thus, I argue, Chesterton overly restricts what can constitute a good home that fulfills our spiritual and social needs. I conclude by sketching a social vision that is less restrictive and more feasible than Chesterton’s, but that I hope is still “Chestertonian” and distributist in spirit.