Maximos the Confessor (Cambridge, Trinity College, MS O.3.48)

...incorporeal, or body and incorporeal, I prophesy, they say all things back again. And if [they mean] that they have ceased [from] the body, [then] save everything from them; [it is] corruption. For the argument [that] holds the opinion about this, until you, it was agreed that the soul is incorporeal.

A woodcut depicts a red ornamental initial letter Epsilon. But if [one] posits that the soul is incorporeal in quality of certain powers, [and] the essence [is] productive, that [is], and to think of it [as] alone itself. And [it] changes some recent phenomena, as he says, [while] the corruption [is] in the [relation of] ruling and being ruled. And just as [the] soul [is] an incorporeal [thing] created by nature [as] a beginning of the body; [so] as a body in this [sense], by [the one] that is by essence; and [by] those [things] that are only by quality powerfully [able], [it is] to be ruled and [it is] their essence; and [it is] the corrupting according to the common relationship of all.

A woodcut depicts a red ornamental initial letter Epsilon. But if [they are] saying that it is soulless or an evil body, not perceptible and [not] their perception, and [then] it will be perceptible. But [surely] all these things are seen toward the soul and [as] being the soul and perception. Therefore, the soul [is] not incorporeal. For if [it were] a body, it would have to consist in a body [while] making it. [It] is able to say [that] we do not pass [it] by. But [regarding] it as a body, in some [way] perceiving: they perceive [it]. For [that] which is at once and unconnected [to] the things that are towards it: we declare; [though it is] of those that differ much, [it] has [an] unbefitting existence. It is clear that [they are] calling the divine incorporeal. The one [who] truly appears [to] me [to be in] fear; they do not accept [the idea of] calling the soul self-moving; so that they might render it careless to God for capture: and the rest or with how many having defined [it] [with] fixed gaze; he gave to them. [The] senselessness; [that] which is [the] unyielding; as many as [are] partaking from God. And [being] pushed from them what you [are] of forms and giving. Or after giving [it] names, and in flesh alone to be looked upon. What [are] we [to make] of these, [the] being, [the] living, [the] being enlightened, [the] being made good, [the] reasoning, [the] becoming wise. Some of these [belong] to its essence; others, through the motion in the products and disposition; for [He is] only God and [the] life, and [the] light [is]; and good. And wise. And rational. We call God similarly, being and life [as] light. And good. And mind; and word [we name them]. [We name them] from [the] causes and beings, these [are] not [the things] themselves [in] their staying, as [if] they were created out of the things of the others [but rather] offering these to God. Therefore, the argument [is] to them. These [are] all [the things] [that] you [should] attend to. To many; [it is] to say the soul and to be named. [But] no longer incorporeal, because just as [the] divine is said to us as dogma alone. Therefore, [why] [is] the divine or the mortal [to be] named these [things]. [Or] how [would it be] likely; but carelessly. And names [are] [given] and we are named; not as [being] the same as God because of these [things] being [so]. But as if in an image all things?...