We can see that the CCC also uses some of the same wording:
1849 Sin is an offense against reason, truth, and right conscience; it is failure in genuine love for God and neighbor caused by a perverse attachment to certain goods.
Can you see also that even when we sin, there is something good that we want?
Looking again at those who crucified Christ, we may think “what ‘good’ did they want?” Well, they wanted justice, and they saw Jesus as an outlaw, a blasphemer. The ‘good’ that they wanted was to punish an offender so as to discourage such behavior, the good they wanted was justice itself.
Just kinda ‘wondering aloud’ here: Basically, humanity had a gut-level reaction to Jesus. He violated their collective conscience, and they became perversely attached to punish.
We have learned through the centuries that when we want to punish someone, we do not do so objectively; the resentment and anger blind our empathy. This is why a proper modern judge keeps all emotional want to punish out of his mind, otherwise the lack of objectivity ends up manifesting very unfair distribution of penalty, as his mood would have too much to do with it. In order to stay objective, a just judge has to see the defendant as a person just like he is.
It is pretty clear, then, that Jesus is “turning cheek” in a very big way, and his profession of forgiveness from the cross stands as an act of love in the face of a perverse attachment to justice.
And then, what about images of God? Is a God who does not go after that lost sheep, I mean really go after anyone who is lost, at any time , regardless what the person has done and failed to repent from doing, is such a God a projection, an anthropomorphism, of the person we are when we are perversely attached to justice?
But I must edit: “perversely” is too severe a word. Our capacity for “attachment” in itself is natural, it is good. “Perversely” reflects a negative reaction to this human capacity (a reaction which is also natural, but we are called to transcend). We can leave “perversely” out of that question…