My wife and I have made the joint decision that it would be an irresponsible thing to do in the current stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is shocking that it has come to this, as we regard the religious celebration of the birth of Jesus as the central aspect of Christmas Day, even greater than our family celebration. However, there was a choice to be made.

We are on the NSW South Coast, and from past experience we know that the local church will be abnormally crowded - a mixture of locals and holidaymakers from Sydney, Canberra and elsewhere. Mass is conducted indoors; masks are not compulsory and will be worn only by a minority; some unvaccinated people will be present; and social distancing will break down, although there will be QR code registration.

We considered the option of sitting or standing outside the church, as we have done at times during the height of the pandemic, but on this occasion a livestream of Mass elsewhere seems to be the more sensible option.

The context of our decision is the simultaneous spread of the Omicron variant of COVID, and the decision by the NSW government to persist with the removal of pandemic restrictions. NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet is standing firm in his resolve not to reimpose some restrictions temporarily over the Christmas-New Year period. In doing so, he is clearly resisting medical advice. At least the days of political leaders hiding behind their medical advisers, reciting the mantra of "following medical advice", are gone.

The medical advice is consistent. It comes not just from the state's chief health officer, Dr Kerry Chant, who has clearly fallen out of favour with the Premier, but a wider range of academic medical experts. Several professors from the Kirby Institute at the University of Sydney and the Doherty Institute have issued a joint call for the return of restrictions "on how people mix for a few weeks while we get more information on Omicron's severity and its ability to evade vaccines".

"Most straightforward is the return of indoor mask requirements, which represent a minimal imposition and cost virtually nothing," they continue.

"Cancelling, or at least heavily restricting, large indoor events will be unpopular, particularly over the Christmas-New Year period, but must be understood as temporary measures."

In our view, our Christmas Mass should be classified as a large indoor event; hence our decision. It should not be exempted because of its religious character. It could even be said that people of faith should show leadership at this testing time.

Instead of taking such expert advice, the Premier, supported by Prime Minister Scott Morrison, says it is all a matter of personal responsibility, which boils down to individual rather than government or collective action.

Personal responsibility is one of today's buzzwords. It sounds sensible and attractive, but what does it mean? For us it means taking responsibility for those things within our control, even if sacrifices are involved. At a minimum, this means wearing masks in all indoor settings.

As we are double-vaccinated, it also means seeking out a third booster shot as quickly as possible. We have done that, but under the five-month rule currently in place, we are not eligible until early January. We have made a booking for January 7, knowing that our current protection is now fading, and that we are therefore at our most vulnerable.

Personal responsibility also means being cautious in other ways, as many health experts are advising, and avoiding, where possible, other indoor spaces. Retail needs at Christmas make that difficult, too.

To be consistent, personal responsibility also means rejecting other tempting offers during this time, such as tickets to the fourth Test at the Sydney Cricket Ground.

READ MORE:

We are not alone. Others are making similar sacrifices out of an abundance of caution. Our family members joining us from Sydney for Christmas are taking COVID tests this week, though they have no symptoms. They want to be sure they are not spreading the virus from Sydney to the South Coast.

Taking personal responsibility may not be enough. The advice may even be just a sop. Those giving this advice know that. They have set a course based on economic and/or ideological considerations, and will not be diverted from it. Many economists, too, dispute this course, and argue it may backfire as many people self-impose restrictions. It is only when millions of citizens choose to take personal responsibility that it may be effective.

There has been advice to avoid venues like gyms and pubs during this Christmas period. These usual suspects look like easy pickings to us.

We are surprised that in the official advice which has been issued, there has been no attention given to religious services. Perhaps in these days of heated religious freedom debates, advice to avoid indoor church services where possible was just too hard. Religious lobbies, believing they have been picked on by secular governments during the pandemic, have demonstrated their lobbying power already.

Religious ceremonies over Christmas are at the heart of Christianity, but also serve an important symbolic function for the churches as worshipper numbers swell. They are also major opportunities for evangelisation as many irregular Easter/Christmas Christians attend church, taking their children and grandchildren with them.

A decision not to attend is not lightly taken; but a faithful person can still celebrate the religious festival in their heart as an act of personal responsibility.