We are indeed here at the very _crux_ of Synoptic criticism.
For our present purpose however it is not necessary that the question should be solved.

We have already obtained an answer on the two points raised by Papias.

The second Gospel _is_ written in order; it is _not_ an original document.

These two characteristics make it improbable that it is in its present shape the document to which Papias alludes.
Does his statement accord any better with the phenomena of the first Gospel?
He asserts that it was originally written in Hebrew, and that the large majority of modern critics deny to have been the case with our present Gospel.

Many of the quotations in it from the Old Testament are made directly from the Septuagint and not from the Hebrew.