You said, “… The Jesus I know and love does not ask us to suffer as He did. He suffered so that we need not do so…”
I want to know where you got the idea that Our Lord suffered so that we don’t need to, that’s all. You wrote that, but He didn’t say that. The Apostles didn’t say that. They both said very clearly that the follower of Christ was choosing suffering–not because suffering was a good thing, but because fidelity was a necessary thing that necessarily involves suffering from time to time.
No one here is asking the OP or anyone else to seek suffering for the sake of suffering. The point is that when fidelity requires one to suffer, then one remains faithful. That is the kind of suffering that was meant by “fiilling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ on behalf of his body, which is the church” (Col. 1:24) You don’t go looking for suffering, but you do stay vigilant to what fidelity requires you to do and you remain willing to suffer in order to remain faithful to love of God and love of neighbor, when that is required. When the sick or suffering person remains faithful in spite of their suffering, it is not the suffering that pleases God. You are right: God does not rejoice in suffering! It is the *fidelity even in spite of suffering *that pleases God.
As you are implying, however, fidelity and the demands of health and safety are not contrary to each other. Fidelity gives us certain religious duties, but fidelity also gives us duties to avoid harming ourselves or others. I still expect my pastor would say what I did: do not skip Mass because it is inconvenient or difficult, but do weigh whether honoring the obligation to go to Mass conflicts with another duty, such as the duty to do dangerous work in a safe way or taking common sense care of your health or the health of others. One pastor, in fact, gave an announcement reminding parishioners that when they have a communicable disease they have a duty to STAY HOME AND KEEP OTHERS SAFE. He didn’t want to see someone drag themselves to church with the flu and think they were being dutiful Catholics when in fact they were probably going to make a lot of other people miserable, not to mention rendering them unable to fulfill their daily duties.
*Let us hold unwaveringly to our confession that gives us hope, for he who made the promise is trustworthy. We must consider how to rouse one another to love and good works. We should not stay away from our assembly, as is the custom of some, but encourage one another, and this all the more as you see the day drawing near. * Heb 10:23-25
The duty to attend Mass is a real obligation. That is not to say it is an obligation from which one is not ever excused. No one here is saying that. They are saying that it is a real obligation that should be missed only for a sufficiently serious reason. I think most of us here would say that the one to help you discern what is “sufficiently serious” is your pastor, who has the authority to dispense the obligation when such a serious reason exists. (Notice that I didn’t say absolve the sin of missing, but dispense the obligation. Missing for a legitimate reason is not a sin at all.)