I know that. But thanks for the repetition in case anyone should need it. Thought the case was being made with the error – the other way around.
That the person accusing the Pope of heresy thought he was saying that God was a man and not a Spirit (a spiritless man?

). And that the argument was being made that Jesus was no longer a man but a Spirit. This part of it being less a discussion of His Divinity and humanity than his current form - if I understand this confusing issue right.
The fully God, fully Man theology you stated is correct and a mystery established by Church dogma long ago (“true God and true man” as one Catholic litany puts it).
What Jesus is NOW (does he have a body … at all …or is He just a Spirit?) was referenced by the scripture I posted. Though it’s NOT that simple. Jesus in His resurrected body seems to materialize and disappear, or come through locked doors without entering physically in the usual way … and He ascends into heaven on His own power.
St. Paul tells us that we ourselves will have different bodies when we are in heaven (should we make it).
Conclusions: 1) The Pope did not teach heresy 2) The Pope’s critic misunderstood (or worse) 3) Jesus Christ is true God and true Man 4) Jesus rose from the grave bodily
5) He is not IN a “body without a spirit”, nor is He a “spirit without a body” (see number 3 if still necessary).