John Roy Harris
1915-2010
"We may safely say truth is like the mountain peaks, he who goes beyond, descends." —Roy Harris, 1944
The Life of John Roy Harris
In the rugged hills of the Ozarks, in a small community called Brixey, Missouri, a boy named John Roy Harris was born on a cold December day in 1915—either the 9th or the 12th, depending on which record you read. He was the youngest of seven children, the son of Riley Alton Harris (1874-1939) and Ella May Young (1876-1960). Life on the rough hillside farm where he was raised was not easy, but it instilled in him a quiet strength and a deep appreciation for the simple, enduring things of life—faith, family, and music.
From a young age, Roy was drawn to the rhythms of gospel music and the spiritual energy of church gatherings. Though his formal education would later take him to Southwest Missouri State College in Springfield and even to the University of Indiana, it was his early spiritual experiences that truly shaped his life. During a gospel meeting in Brixey, led by the elder brother Brumback, (the father of Robert Brumbeck) Roy made his confession of faith in Christ. He was baptized by brother Will Young, an event that marked the beginning of a life-long devotion to the gospel.
As a young man, Roy recognized that his gifts lay not only in preaching but also in music. He enrolled in the Stamps-Baxter School of Music in Dallas, Texas, completing two courses and graduating with a deeper mastery of vocal music. This education opened new doors for him to teach singing schools, direct congregational singing, and eventually compose his own hymns.
He preached his first sermon in Almartha, Missouri, and held his first extended gospel meeting in Summersville in 1940. From then on, his life was a continuous cycle of ministry and music. He had a gift—not just for speaking the Word, but for setting it to music in ways that would linger in the hearts of listeners. His talent found its fullest expression in hymns like “Hilltops of Glory,” a song that would go on to be published in many hymnals and recorded by numerous gospel groups. Even decades later, its joyful message of eternal hope continues to echo in church buildings across the country.
In the classroom, Roy was just as committed. He taught school in Kansas, where he also settled down with his beloved wife, Nellie Mary Anderson (1918-2002), whom he married on November 5, 1958. Together they made their home on Route 2 in Cawker City, Kansas, and from there, Roy continued to write, preach, and travel to conduct gospel meetings. He also composed children’s songs, which were used in Vacation Bible Schools, delighting young learners and nurturing their early faith.
Roy’s life was not one of fame or riches, but it was rich in meaning. He poured himself into the lives of others, whether through his gospel preaching, song leading, or music composition. His biography was honored in Ed and Gene C. Finley’s book, Our Garden of Song, a fitting tribute to a man whose life was, quite literally, a garden of song and service.
As the years passed, Roy remained a steady figure in the Church of Christ community. When he passed, he was laid to rest in one of the most beautiful spots in the Ozarks of southern Missouri, near the same land where he had been born and baptized. A Church of Christ building stands on the hill nearby, with a large cemetery behind it that overlooks a peaceful valley—a serene and breathtaking resting place, befitting a man who spent his life helping others fix their eyes on the “hilltops of glory.”
-Scott Harp, 05.26.2025
Why We Sing and Do Not Play
By ROY HARRIS, Brixey, Mo.
John Roy Harris is the son of Riley and May Harris. He was born at Brixey, Missouri on December 9, 1915, and with the exception of one year spent at Fairgrove, north of Springfield, he has lived near Brixey all of his life. It was there, during the preaching of the elderly Brother Brumback (father of Robert Brumback) that he made his confession of faith in Christ, and was immersed by Bro. Will Young.
Almartha, Missouri was the scene of his first gospel sermon, and in 1940, he held his first protracted meeting at Summersville. Roy has a great deal of talent, not only as a preacher of the Word, but also as a song director. He has composed and written the music to several beautiful gospel hymns, and has been a force for good in teaching many the rudiments of vocal music. To improve the talent thus given him, he took two courses with the Stamps-Baxter School of Music at Dallas, Texas, and is a graduate of that institution. His time is in demand constantly now, either directing singing or conducting meetings.
____________________
Why We Sing and Do Not Play
By ROY HARRIS, Brixey, Mo.
A great man once said: "Let me write a nation's songs and I care not who shall write its laws.” No one can deny that songs have wielded a great influence over the lives and destinies of men and nations. What the law attempts to achieve through force, an uplifting song may accomplish by instilling ennobling sentiment in the heart of an individual while he is scarcely aware of the fact. One may get an insight into the background of a race or nation by studying its songs. Especially is that true of religious songs. Songs reflect the attitude of people as well as the condition of the times.
The faith of the reformer, Martin Luther is shown in his "Mighty Fortress.” In the midst of the storms of persecution which were raging about him he could sing "A Mighty Fortress is our God, a bulwark never failing." In the "Spirituals" of the American Negro there is portrayed the simple, trusting faith as well as the longing for deliverance of a down-trodden people. When we today sing "The Sweet By And By" or "When The Roll Is Called Up Yonder" to alleviate the heartache caused by an open grave, we are demonstrating anew the hope which springs eternal in the human breast. Such songs as these, sung by earthbound children of eternity, expressing glimpses of the rainbow's end, cheer the weary traveler as he trudges the lonely vale, lifting his soul above the clouds of morbidity and oppression, carrying his spirit on angels' wings to celestial heights of paradise.
Even the folk songs, such as Stephen Foster's melodies, have played their part, indicating ones' love for home and native land. The "jazz" songs of recent years reflect the restlessness of an era of the world which culminated in World War Two, just as many of the war songs show an earnest desire for a return to peace and tranquility.
One should live the song he sings. He should let its sentiments absorb his soul. This is definitely true of the religious songs. A song becomes our own, no matter by whom it is written, when we apply it to our own lives. There is an appeal about a gospel song, lifted from sincere, devoted hearts, cracked and quavering though their voices be, which is unmatched by the music of the world. Through this medium the average worshipper expresses an intensity of feeling he is otherwise unable to utter. The religious song is at the same time warning and instructive without being offensive; sweet and appealing without being obviously sentimental; sad and plaintive but not morbid; joyful and cheerful yet not loose or abandoned.
The history of singing is interwoven with the history of man. Angels sang to shepherds the night our Savior was born, and it was included by the Apostles as a part of the worship of the early church. But while singing in the worship of the New Testament church is as old as the apostles, playing upon mechanical instruments is not. It sometimes seems strange to our denominational friends that we of the church of Christ use only unaccompanied singing. They apparently conclude we are the only religious body that has ever so practiced. Actually, it is only in recent years instrumental music has been widely adopted by the Protestant churches. Multitudes of earnest people, both living and dead, have opposed its use in divine worship. For over six hundred years it was absent altogether. Its introduction, under opposition, was effected by pope Vitalian I. This came about not earlier than the year 666. Some authorities say 670. (See Chambers’ Encyclopedia; also American Encyclopedia).
The great reformers were emphatic in their opposition. Calvin said it would be as much out of place as the burning of incense and other ceremonies of the Old Law. Luther voiced his disapproval as did Wesley, who said: "I have no objection to an organ in our chapel, provided it is neither seen nor heard.” We are told that such music was not allowed by Spurgeon, one of the great Baptist preachers of England. Adam W. Clark, who wrote a great commentary for the Methodist Church, stated he had never known the use of instrumental music to be productive of good and he had known it to cause evil. Like he said, "I can say that music as a science I admire, but man-made instruments in the worship I can not approve.” The Greek Catholic Church, with its millions of communicants, has never used them. Since the New Testament was written in Greek, if there was any shade of meaning there indicating their use, surely the Greeks would have found it as they were reading their native language. Especially does it seem so in view of the proneness of man to add anything of a human nature which he thinks at all permissible.
It is probably true that one who has been accustomed to special music will find ordinary singing rather "tame," and one who is interested in worship for its aesthetic rather than its spiritual value may even consider it boresome but to one who is filled with the spirit, or devotion to God it should be as unnecessary as intoxicating drink to the abstainer who needs only pure water to quench his thirst.
First, let me say I believe in the use of instruments with which to serve God. In the song-service I believe in praising Him upon the most perfect instrument obtainable. One created by the Lord. Every person has in his throat an instrument consisting of the vocal chords. The vibrations of this tiny instrument, when properly tuned and regulated, are capable of reproducing harmonious tones unequaled by any other instrument on earth. Witness the number and effectiveness of a cappella choirs in schools and other groups of young people. However, the mere matter of pleasing sound effects would be poor authority for any act directed as worship of God. The question which will naturally govern who one seeks to please God and not himself is, what has He authorized? We do not believe the Lord has sanctioned the use of man-made musical instruments in the worship of the church of the New Testament. And to restate an old motto, we wish to speak only where He has spoken.
Music is generally classified under two heads: Vocal and instrumental. Vocal is that which is made by singing; instrumental that which is produced by playing. We will henceforth use these two terms in their accepted meanings. Let us list all the scriptures bearing upon this matter after the church was established (Acts 2) and see what the consensus of scriptural teaching reveals.
The first mention is recorded in Acts 16:25, "Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God.” No instrument here, other than the vocal chords. But someone may say they did not have access to an instrument, being in prison. Possibly true, but one thing we must admit, it was possible to have an acceptable song-service without mechanical instruments.
Next see Romans 15:9, "Sing unto thy name."
(1 Cor. 14:15). "Sing with the spirit and sing with the understanding." "Sing with the spirit" is sometimes defined as meaning to sing with the proper attitude of mind. On the other hand it may have had a stronger significance to the early Christians, indicating they were to sing as they were guided by the Holy Spirit, direct from heaven. If so the principle applies today since we are to do all things as the Spirit has revealed through the word. Thus, unless He has authorized instruments we could not use them and sing with the spirit. "Sing with the understanding" shows this act of worship is one which appeals to the intelligence of man. Mechanical music alone appeals only to the emotions. The only way an instrumental solo could appeal to the understanding would be for the hearer to associate words with it. Otherwise it would be entertainment only, pure and simple. Well, is there anything wrong with a person being entertained? Perhaps not in its proper place but have we no higher motive than that for worshipping God? Singing may awaken the emotions yet always at the same time directs itself to the understanding also.
"Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord" (Eph. 5:19). "Speaking" and "Singing" could only be done upon the vocal chords while the instrument designated for us to make melody upon is the human heart. Each of these forms of music: "psalms", "hymns", "spiritual songs", was one in which they could speak. I believe these three terms can be classified thus: (1) Psalms formed a large number of their songs of that day which were sung or chanted in unison. We still use many of the psalms, some of them rearranged that they may more easily be set to music. (2) A hymn may in a broad sense be defined as an uninspired song based upon the Scriptures, addressed principally to God. Such a song may be found in "Sweet Hour of Prayer", "Nearer My God To Thee", "Rock Of Ages", etc. They are more definitely devotional than a gospel song. (3) A gospel song or "spiritual song" may be very generally defined as an uninspired song based upon the Scriptures, chiefly addressed to man and intended for the purpose of instructing, arousing, warning, comforting or encouraging. A good example of this type is found in such songs as "Send The Light" and "Let The Lower Lights Be Burning.” Often we find a song which has the combined attributes of all, or at least of both hymn and gospel song. Such a one must be called "semi-hymnal.”
Both devotional hymns or psalms and rousing gospel songs have their place in the services and both types should be used. A meeting where only grave devotional hymns are sung will usually be lacking in life and enthusiasm and we should remember that in Col. 3:16 we are instructed to "teach and admonish one another" in the song-service, thus we should choose songs of an instructive and exhortative nature as well as those of praise and devotion to God. On the other hand, a song-service of only the arousing gospel-song class might fail to create the solemn, worshipful attitude necessary for prayer, the Lord's Supper and occasions of like nature. Especially does it seem to me the hymnal type should be used on Lord's Day mornings. At mid-week or protracted evangelistic meetings perhaps the livelier type of gospel song should predominate. By all means the song-leader should give some fore-thought to the selection of songs. It is practically as important to make proper selections as it is to be able to sing. Nearly always it is better to begin the service with a good rousing gospel song such as "Send The Light", "Standing On The Promises", or "Higher Ground.” Then possibly just before prayer an old hymn as for example, "Sweet Hour of Prayer." Many times, through a little planning, the songs can be arranged so they will definitely tie in with the sermon or Bible lesson.
"In the midst of the church will I sing praises unto thee." This (Heb. 2:12) expressly authorizes vocal music in the church, yet the New Testament gives us neither precept nor example for instrumental music. When we realize that God has emphatically commanded us to hear Christ, (Matt. 17:5) "Hear ye Him" and Jesus has given not one word that even intimates its use, no person can add instrumental music without disobeying (Matt. 17:5). You might be hearing David or some other Old Testament writer but in the presence of two such men (Moses and Elias) God commanded to hear Jesus Christ, making it plain Christ's will supersedes theirs. Why do you not offer the bloody sacrifice or burn incense today? You may say because they were a part of the "ceremonial law" of the Old Testament. Instrumental music was not even included as a part of the original "ceremonial law.” It was ordained by David and employed as a co-offering with the burnt sacrifice. (2 Chr. 29:28-29).
The worn-out argument, that Jesus did not forbid it in so many words, is a weak one in view of the fact that you cannot hear a person upon a subject about which he has not spoken. Are we trying to build a practice around the silence of our Lord or upon what is written? Even the most ardent advocates of mechanized music must admit Christ did not mention it.
The word tells us (2 Peter 1:3), "according as his divine power has given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness." Did He give us another music besides vocal? If not, then it does not pertain to either life or godliness. In other words, it is not necessary to have it in order to receive eternal life, nor to live a godly life on earth. Then is it not a safe plan to omit it? Is it not, in fact, unsafe to add anything which God did not consider essential to either life or godliness? Do we yet seek to please men, or God?
Again, Jesus told the apostles He would send the Holy Spirit to guide them into all truth (John 16:13), who would also bring all things to their remembrance, whatsoever the Savior had said unto them (John 14:26). Now it is evident, since the apostles were as silent as the grave about the matter, both by precept and example, mechanical music was not taught by our Lord, else the Holy Spirit considered it of insufficient importance to bring to the remembrance of the apostles. Too, He was to guide them into all truth so unless the Spirit failed in His mission, it is not a part of "all truth" and is not required to become free from sin, for "ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32). We may safely say truth is like the mountain peaks, he who goes beyond, descends. The early disciples "continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers." (Acts 2:42). Doctrine means "teaching.” To continue steadfastly or firmly in the apostles' doctrine is to abide in their teaching. Was instrumental music a part of the apostles' teaching? Ardent exponents of its use admit it was not, so how can one who uses it claim to abide in the apostles' doctrine (teaching)?
Do we place ourselves with Balaam of old who wanted to see if God would not say something "more" than He had already said? Balaam knew God had not told him to go on this mission but he asked for something more in the way of instructions and he got it, though not exactly what he had expected. But so determined was he to receive Balak's reward he interpreted it as direct testimony that God would bless him in his efforts. We know what happened. (Num. 22). Some today acknowledge the Savior did not definitely specify instrumental music but say "where does He say we cannot have it?" Then, because we are determined to have it, we scan obscure shades of Scriptural meaning, grabbing at straws of divine sanction, until at last we persuade ourselves God has spoken something "more" on the subject. "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book" (Rev. 22:18). To insert instrumental music is to add something to Christ. Do you not think it unwise, my friend, to presume upon the mercy of God to the extent of willfully adding to his word?
Just here perhaps we should consider two passages in the New Testament which definitely speak of harps in connection with worship. (Rev. 5:8, Rev. 14:2). The first of these tells us everyone of the persons seen by John had one of these harps, so whatever they were, I believe every worshipper should have one of them if we are to use this as authority for harps in the church. But so far as the record informs us not a note of instrumental music was heard by the apostle John. Listen! "I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: and they sung as it were a new song." Notice John heard voices singing. I believe the harps here were the vocal chords. Not once does it say he heard them playing. Even if it had, would that alone permit us to do the same in the church today? Whatever God sees fit to have in heaven will be wholly sanctified, free from any improper influence, but that does not prove it would occupy the same status in the church on earth. We believe the Bible teaches us babies will go to heaven but that does not give us authority to sprinkle them and receive them into the church. Even among those bodies which practice sprinkling babies they are accepted into the church as "confirmed" members, thus could not contend that anything which is in heaven ought to be used in the church. After all much of Revelation is figurative. What good would literal harps be to angelic beings?
In the days of Christ the Jews were adding their doctrines and traditions to the commandments of God. Jesus said: "In vain ye do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men" (Matt 15:9). Even historians agree instrumental music originated with man. The best that can be said for it is that it has been accepted by honest people and handed down as a teaching or tradition of men. And the kindest statement I know to make concerning it is that it is safe to not use it.
The person who persists in its use because he likes the sound is placing his own feelings ahead of safety in spiritual matters. Why should we censure the Hindu when he bows down before his heathen god and thinks he is accepted because he smells the odor of sweet incense, supposing his god would not permit the sweet odor to pervade the temple if he was not pleased, when we allow our "feelings" to be our standard rather than the authority of Christ? Being guided by such standard, are we not yielding to the lust (desire) of the flesh?
Or possibly it is more often the "pride of life", since one of the most common reasons people desire an organ or piano in "their church" is so they can be like others around them. They are akin to the Israelites in that they wish to resemble the denominations about them (1 Sam. 8:19-20).
I have two complaints to lodge against instrumental music. (1) Where it originated (with man); (2) where it leads. One departure usually leads to a greater. When instruments were first brought into the church the plea was advanced they would only be utilized to assist the singer in getting the pitch and furnish a prop to aid him in keeping the tune while he sang, but soon the instrument began to be the center of attraction, rather than the singing, until the churches started trying to outdo each other with expensive organs and special instrumental numbers to attract attention. Alas, that in the edifice supposed to be erected to worship the lowly Nazarene in, pride in fancy fixtures should all too often predominate in the heart of the worshipper, instead of devotion to God. Alas, too, that the poor, who in the days of Christ had the gospel preached to them, should have money squeezed from them to buy organs and the other expensive furniture which must be included, then oft-times feeling unwelcome and ill at ease in their modest garb amid such surroundings, are forced to sit meekly down outside.
It seems man would rather be entertained, even at the house of God, than exert himself enough to develop the talent God has given him. Thus more and more a chosen (and possibly remunerated) few emphasize their skill by singing too difficult for the average communicant to even understand, calculated to show off the performers' ability more than to express the heart’s desire to God.
Man's laziness and failure to develop his God-given aptitude for singing are frequently responsible for additions to the worship. If all my brethren believed in and practiced vocal music there would not be so great a clamor for the instrumental. Too many practice vocal noise, apparently thinking mere racket is singing. Small wonder, under those circumstances, when denominational friends attend, they feel we should have an organ to drown out the discords. Each person needs to be taught the song-service is not for his benefit only, to give him a chance to display his superior lung-power. All should attempt to blend their voices. This does not require an enormous amount of training. A lot depends on what a person tries to do. We should at least harmonize enough that the worshipers’ mind will not be distracted from the spirit of the occasion by some who are either much louder than, or half a beat behind, the rest. Especially should this be watched by one who is a poor singer. Not that he need quit altogether but he should attempt to keep with the congregation and modulate his voice so it will not blare forth discordantly. If he knows nothing about reading music he should learn. I believe the congregation ought to see he is given the opportunity, and insist that he take advantage of it if he wants to continue to participate in the singing.
How often we hear the parable of the talents mentioned and are reminded of the fate of the one who hid his talent. Yet how many of us are holding our talent for singing. Few and far between are the persons born with no natural ability to sing, though with rare exceptions none of them are good singers without both training and practice. God furnished us with a foundation of natural ability upon which he expects us to build. In the parable of the talents each one was required to make all the gain he could according to what had been given him. Yet possibly not three percent of the average congregations have ever achieved their full possibilities in the matter of singing. Even then the singing is often surprisingly good, but shall we be satisfied with anything less than our best? You may do reasonably well as you are, still if you have opportunity to do better are you not neglecting your duty by failing to improve it? I verily believe some brethren have been more interested in arguing with their religious neighbors than in demonstrating to them that the Lord’s plan will work. The greatest reasoning that can be produced against instrumental music is a church that can sing well. Let us devote some of the time we waste on argument to development of talent and many times we will find an argument unnecessary.
With the simple methods in which most of the sacred songs are written reading of notes is possible for the average member of every congregation. With the exception of the “one in a thousand” person who is tone deaf here is one phase of the worship in which every member can participate publicly. The Lord never commanded anyone to do anything impossible and if after, much study and practice one still could not carry a tune under any consideration I do not think he should attempt to sing aloud. He might still look on the book and follow in his mind, thus making melody in his heart though he cannot make it in his voice, and might distract others by trying.
In concluding, there are a few miscellaneous points I feel deserve attention.
Occasionally, someone concludes if we are not to have instrumental music in worship we should not have it in the home or anywhere else. God has given us specific items of worship and general rules to govern our private lives. A little common sense reasoning will tell us there are many things we may have in the home or other places which would not be permissible to perform as acts of worship. This is so obvious it scarcely seems essential to call attention to the fact. For instance, within certain limitations we are permitted to have whatsoever we desire on our tables at home but when it comes to the Lord’s Table, Christ gave us the bread and the fruit of the vine which excludes other elements. Still, there is no scripture which says we must not have milk in the Communion service.
Again, the contention is made that there is as much authority for musical instruments as for song books, tuning forks, and similar articles. Let us take an Old Testament example by way of illustration. When God told Noah to build the ark, He instructed him the material should be gopher wood. Would the Lord have been pleased if Noah had selected oak or some other lumber? You will say: “Certainly not. The divine blue-print called for gopher wood.” But what has that to do with the question under consideration? Simply this: When God gave a command and also defined the means or methods to be employed, that excluded all other materials and methods, but where a command was given and the details, such as materials, methods, time, place, etc., were not specified, man was at liberty to use his judgment so long as he stayed within the bounds of other general teaching.
Now for the application to our subject. There are two kinds of music: vocal and instrumental. Vocal is produced by singing, “speaking”, while instrumental is made by playing. If Jesus had indicated He wanted us to praise Him with music and had not said what kind, we believe either or both would be acceptable. When “speaking”, “singing”, and “fruit of lips” (Heb. 13:15) are all referred to and playing is not mentioned, however, we believe that eliminates all music besides vocal. The use of song books, or tuning forks could not add another kind of music since you cannot play a tune upon either of them. Using them as aids you would still have to sing if you made music at all. In other words, vocal music is the only kind you could have, whereas a piano, organ or such like would of necessity constitute an addition, producing another kind of music.
Nadab and Abihu lost their lives by reason of the strange fire with which they offered their sacrifice of incense (Lev. 10:1-5). God had told them to get fire from the altar in the outer court. If the Lord had only said “fire” any fire might have been permissible. It was “strange” because it was different from what God had commanded them. They had been told where to obtain the fire, thus all other was excluded. These things are examples to us. (1 Cor. 10:11). Are we proffering strange music, that is, foreign to what God has commanded?
Finally, when the “tumult and the shouting dies,” when the noise of reasoning, pro and con, has all died away, one fact forever remains unshaken and unshakable. It is safe to just sing. Here, then, is a point we can all unite upon. If we of the Church of Christ would reverse our attitude toward instrumental music there would still be no unanimity of opinion on the matter since there are other religious groups that will not use it. Our railroads have stressed a motto: “Safety First.” Why can we not do the same in religion? Or is safety more important to us in physical matters than in religious affairs?
Learning to blend our voices in spiritual song might be a good beginning toward harmonizing our lives one with another. Let us learn to love, sing and obey the lessons taught by scriptural songs here that we may get a foretaste of the rapture that is to come when we shall “sing the song of Moses and the Lamb, by and by, and dwell with Jesus evermore.”
-Roy Harris,
Ed. W. Carl Ketcherside, To Every Man That Asketh: "Show You" Sermons From The "Show Me" State, A Collection of Sermons Prepared By Missouri Preachers, p.48-61
Source: Ancestry.com
Roy Harris is remembered as the producer of one of the most cherished hymns in 20th-century Christian music—Hilltops of Glory. In the late spring of 2025, the web editor had the honor of visiting his final resting place. Nestled in the breathtaking Ozarks of southern Missouri, the setting was nothing short of magnificent. A church of Christ building stands gracefully on the side of a hill, with a spacious cemetery stretching behind it and a sweeping valley unfolding beyond, rising to hilltops in the distance. Serene and awe-inspiring, this tranquil location offers a truly fitting place for a faithful servant to rest—awaiting the glorious return of the Savior.
Source: Ancestry.com - jmkoch1958
Ozark County Times Gainesville, Missouri
Wednesday, August 11,
2010, p.6
Gallatin North Missourian, Gallatin, Missouri
Thursday, November 21, 1946, p.2
Directions To Grave
Smith Chapel church of Christ Cemetery, located on Hwy N in southern Missouri, in the community of Zanoni, Ozark County. The best directions will be from the GPS location below that actually mark the grave. Note: The cemetery is located in a beautiful valley, however, you may want to be careful about depending on cell phones, as very few towers are accessible with a cell phone. When I visited I had to do a little bit of traveling blindly with no real directions until I could get to better cell tower connection.
GPS Location
36°42'02.2"N 92°21'56.3"W
or D.d. 36.700623, -92.365646
The Luna Monument In The Cemetery - Elisha and Eliza Luna: Early Settlers In The Valley
HARRIS
J Roy - December 9, 1915 - June 11, 2010
Nell M - February 17, 1918 - February 21, 2002
Married November 6, 1958
Photos Taken 05.03.2025
Webpage Produced 05.27.2025
Courtesy Of Scott Harp
www.TheRestorationMovement.com
Special Recognition: The graves of J. Roy and Nell M. Harris were the fourth of 29 graves of gospel preachers it was my privilege to find during the first week of May, 2025. I had the great blessing of traveling from my home in Russellville, Kentucky to Lebanon, Missouri that week for the purpose of preaching a gospel meeting at the South Hwy. 5 church of Christ. During the week, I stayed on American history's most famous U.S. Hwy, Route 66. Daily, I had the opportunity to travel a number of miles to visit graves of preachers of yesteryear. It was a wonderful week for the gospel, and a blessing for me to stand at the graves of giants in the Kingdom of our Christ.