CathInfo.com

Does anyone actually have Church teaching regarding what is expected of a Catholic in such/similar circuмstances?  So far I see a bunch of lay opinions.  

I think the OP is a bit paranoid, albeit understandably. No one needs that intimidation at Mass and considering all that is gong on today, what is happening at her chapel is criminal. But we are obligated to go to Mass and should not be intimidated by that to the point of not going at all -  irritated and angry sure - enough to find another place to go for Mass.

Around the beginning of the revolution, must have been about 1969-70, maybe a year or so before Fr. Ward and the SSPX came to America whenever that was, at least 3 or 4 times we had police and protestors in front of the hall we had Mass at, we could hear them while Mass was going on, I remember one time when the doors were momentarily flung open during consecration by the yelling protestors before being slammed shut by the police, we were even in the news for a while.

At that time, it was common knowledge that Detroit's newly installed Bisop Gumbleton is the one who sent the protestors. All I know is that we never did not go because of that. As I look back, seems like it was during those days that our little group of maybe 40-50 people began to grow so that by the time Fr. Ward came, the hall went from one Mass with most of the hall open space, to it being totally packed to the max for both Masses. 

 
 

Let's say you have 3 options for Sunday mass:  
1) going to a chapel where there are rioters and you might get hit with bricks,
2) going to a chapel where your name will be taken and you'll be reported to the govt and fined $1,000,
3) going to a chapel which is hidden in a garage and nothing will happen to you.
.
Going to option #3, and avoiding physical violence and loss of $1,000 is perfectly fine.  In fact, I think Catholics have the obligation of AVOIDING persecution, when possible.  Because we can't presume on the graces of martydom to be provided by God, since it's a special grace, we can't rush willy-nilly into harm's way.  
.
But...if there is no option #3 above, and your only options are #1 or #2 above, then you have to go to mass.  That's what persecution is - hardship, suffering and pain for the Faith and the glory of God.  I don't know of any stories of the Saints where one was allowed to skip mass to avoid persecution.

I didn't read the whole thread and I'm forgetting the details, but it would seem that if the chapel *itself* is the one providing the persecution, if they're COMPLICT in reporting you to the governnment, that's different than if someone else does it.

In the latter case I agree with you.  Don't think I do in the former case.

I might be persuadable that even if the priest/church is actively and openly reporting their congregants, one is obliged to go.  I'm certainly sympathetic.  I gravitate in your direction here generally.  I thought the shutdowns from Covid in the first place were always wrong for the  obvious reason of like, even if there's a risk of death, the mass comes first.

ALl that said I absolutely do not think we are *morally obliged* to either write our names down, or put a mask on, and if they won't let us in for those reasons, I definitely don't think that's on us.  

It isn't on us, objectively, but on Judgment Day it will absolutely be on the bishops and those complicit priests who promoted this unspeakable violation of the laws of the Church.  Just FYI, in my region, it has been going like this, for all these months:

1. Dictatorial governor
2. Far more dictatorial bishops (selectively) than what was demanded by that same governor
3. Under those selective bishops, priests who are more dictatorial than those bishops. Voluntarily, they have chosen to create, independently, an absolute caricature and parody of restrictions, terrified precautions, etc., to the point where the space within the church is profaned and the place resembles a combination of a prison and a hospital.

There is absolutely no question about a Catholic's obligation.  I have been trying to educate/explain this to confused and "paralyzed" Catholics for the last 7 months:  Divine law is absolute and supersedes human law.  Get thee to the true Mass if one exists in your geography.

Forcing Catholics to attend non-anonymously is a canonical violation, just as refusing an anonymous Confession is. I refuse to engage in such a practice, on principle, and clergy should be utterly ashamed of themselves.  If it were a matter of capacity within the church, then make people line up for each Mass occasion and cut off entrance after that previously published capacity.

For those unsure of whether the Fourth Commandment is more or even as important as the Third Commandment, you should always know that First Tablet Commandments are binding and permanent.  (We know the permitted reasons for missing Mass, so please no one get technical with me.) A lay person who is medically vulnerable to deathly complications from a current contagious disease, when told that not by the MSM but by his own physician, may remove HIMSELF from the Mass, but he has no authority, nor does the priest have divine authority, to demand that the entire local Catholic population remove THEMSELVES from the Mass.

Grow up, Catholics (including clergy).  If you are so tender medically, then do not attend and ask for a home visit of the sacraments. Any priest too terrified to perform his vowed duties is an effeminate excuse for a man  If he is martyred as a result of administering the sacraments, by sickness and death from that act, he will earn his crown. But if any Catholic is damned as a result of his refusal to administer the sacraments (or making it so difficult as to discourage participation, through "registration" and contorted confession arrangements), I hate to think about his Particular Judgment.

Here's Fr. Ripperger's recent explanation of the superior force of First Tablet commandments over the Fourth Commandment: