Interesting is Origen's parallel discussion in the Commentary on Matthew
If, therefore, someone left (ἀφῆκε) everything behind and followed Jesus, he will be furnished with those things said to Peter according to his question; but if not all things, but [only] the things introduced, such a one will receive (cf. Lk 18.30) many times as much and will inherit eternal life (ὁ τοιοῦτος πολλαπλασίονα λήψεται καὶ ζωὴν αἰώνιον κληρονομήσει). One must understand from this, “And each one who left behind (ἀφῆκεν) brothers or sisters,” etc., that certain things have been said specifically (εἰδικῶς λελεγμένα) not comprehensively. Now any person would confess that what is presented here, even at the simple level of the text, is no contemptible word persuading someone to despise all fleshly relatives (τὸ πάσης σαρκικῆς συγγενείας καταφρονεῖν) and every possession (καὶ πάσης τῆς κτήσεως). But if indeed this admits of anagogy, someone may hesitate, but also give an account of what that would involve. Indeed it is clear according to the letter that many of those who believed in our Savior were hated by relatives (πολλοὶ τῶν πιστευσάντων εἰς τὸν σωτῆρα ἡμῶν ἐμισήθησαν ὑπὸ συγ γενῶν), and they chose to forsake them and each possession for the sake of inheriting eternal life (καὶ εἵλαντο τούτους καὶ πᾶσαν κτῆσιν καταλιπεῖν ὑπὲρ τοῦ κληρονομῆσαι τὴν αἰώνιον ζωήν), having been persuaded that each one who leaves behind brothers according to the flesh, sisters who are relatives only in body, parents of bodies, and children of flesh, and the fields in the accursed earth and the houses in it, and leaves behind [these things] for no other reason but for the sake of the name of Jesus, he will receive many times as much (πεισθέντες ὅτι πᾶς ὅστις ἀφῆκε τοὺς κατὰ σάρκα ἀδελφοὺς καὶ τὰς συγγενεῖς μόνῳ τῷ σώματι ἀδελφὰς καὶ γονεῖς τῶν σωμάτων καὶ τὰ τέκνα τῆς σαρκὸς καὶ τοὺς ἐν τῇ ἐπικαταράτῳ γῇ ἀγροὺς καὶ τὰς ἐν αὐτῇ οἰκίας, καὶ ἀφῆκεν οὐ δι' ἄλλο τι ἀλλ' ἕνεκεν τοῦ ὀνό ματος Ἰησοῦ, πολλαπλασίονα λήψεται). For many times as much (πολλαπλασίονα) and (if it is necessary to name it as such) infinitely more times as much are spiritual things to somatic things, and so as to receive many times as much (πολλαπλασίονα), not in the present time (οὐκ ἐν προσκαίρῳ ζωῇ), but what happens in eternity (ἀλλ' ἐν αἰωνίῳ γενόμενος), he will inherit it. For, on the one hand, it is easy to explain the many times as much brothers and sisters (πολλαπλασίονας μὲν γὰρ ἀδελφοὺς καὶ ἀδελφὰς) which someone has left behind on account of the word of God. For indeed in this world many times as much are the brothers-according-to-the-faith than those who have been forsaken on account of unbelief by those who have believed. So also someone receives [as] “parents” all bishops who are free from censure and presbyters who are without reproach, in place of the other two he has forsaken. Similarly also children are all those having the stature of children. But how might one inherit many times more fields or houses than those he has forsaken? It is no longer possible to offer an interpretation similar [to the previous things], unless perhaps someone who has been pressed hard by scarcity commends this, which is not reasonable. Once one allegorizes fields and houses, it will be necessary to offer [an interpretation] in accordance with the [passage’s] sequence and the higher reality of these things.
There are, therefore (I think), among the holy and blessed powers “brothers” who have arrived “unto the perfect man” among
those who have advanced to “the measure of the stature of Christ” (Eph 4.13). “Sisters” are all those who are presented a pure virgin to Christ (cf. 2 Cor 11.2), not from men only (I think), but also from the rest of the powers. “Parents” may perhaps be those concerning whom it was said to Abraham, “You will depart to your fathers with peace, being nourished in good age” (Gen 15.15). But if they became fathers of others at some time (proportionate to these fathers), they will indeed receive many times as much children in a fashion similar to Abraham. Also, I think, you should understand the “many times as much fields and houses than those that are forsaken” in terms of the rest of the divine paradise, and the city of God, concerning which “glorious things
were spoken” (Ps 86.3), of which “God in the palaces is known, whenever he undertakes to help her” (Ps 47.4), so that one might say about those who inherit houses there, “Just as we have heard, so we have seen in the city of the Lord of powers, in the city of our God” (Ps 47.9), concerning which it is also said, “Divide up her palaces” (Ps 47.14). ^Blessed is it to inherit eternal life for these things, having an inheritance of such fields and such trees which are tended by God and houses of living stones (cf. 1 Pet 2.5), in which each one who has left behind brothers or sisters, and the rest, will rest.^ 52
What is so interesting about this is the fact that Origen - again in a supposed 'Commentary on Matthew' - is arguing over wording that appears only in Luke in our canonical four:
“Truly I tell you,” Jesus said to them, “no one who has left home or wife or brothers or sisters or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God will fail to receive many times as much (πολλαπλασίονα) in this age, and in the age to come eternal life.”
I am more and more convinced that Origen was originally arguing from a gospel harmony. It simply doesn't make sense to have the text exhibit these sort of arguments which have no place in a 'Matthew commentary-proper.'
Both Clement and Origen on the surface appear to be writing commentaries on parallel passages in Mark and Matthew but strangely focus their energies on other people who argue certain things from other texts without making specific mention often times of the texts they are using. Like right here for instance. Why doesn't Origen say 'according to Luke' anywhere? It would be expected wouldn't it? It certainly isn't Clement's gospel of Mark (which admittedly elsewhere does exhibit 'harmonized' attributes for Clement's text reads:
Whosoever shall leave what is his own, parents, and brethren, and possessions, for My sake and the Gospel's, shall receive an hundred-fold now in this world, lands, and possessions, and house, and brethren, with persecutions; and in the world to come is life everlasting. But many that are first shall be last, and the last first.
Indeed the very argument Origen lays forward makes it clear he is continuing an argument using his own 'Matthew' gospel - a 'harmonized' Matthew-gospel in the same way Clement's gospel of Mark is a 'harmonized Mark-gospel.'
Moreover Clement, as we have demonstrated, is making explicit reference not only to a harmonized Mark-gospel (viz. citing word for word 'Mark' in the opening chapters) but also implicitly referencing a 'harmonized Matthew-gospel' in the rest of the treatise as we have demonstrated. Isn't it worth noting then that the Arabic Diatessaron - a text that bears remarkable similarity to Clement's harmonized-Matthew elsewhere draws from Luke 18:29 - 30 during the rich man narrative:
Verily I say unto you, It is difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of 2 heaven. And I say unto you also, that it is easier for a camel to enter the eye of 3 a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. And the disciples were wondering at these sayings. And Jesus answered and said unto them again, My children, how hard it is for those that rely on their possessions to enter the 4 kingdom of God! And those that were listening wondered more, and said amongst 5 themselves, being agitated, Who, thinkest thou, can be saved? And Jesus looked at them intently, and said unto them, With men this is not possible, but with God it is. 6 Arabic, it is possible for God to do everything. Simon Cephas said unto him, Lo, we have left everything, and followed thee; what is it, thinkest thou, that we 7 shall have? Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, Ye that have followed me, in the new world, when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also 8 shall sit on twelve thrones, and shall judge the twelve tribes of Israel. Verily I say unto you, No man leaveth houses, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or kinsfolk, or lands, because of the kingdom of God, or for my 9 sake, and the sake of my gospel, who shall not obtain many times as much in this time, and in the world to come inherit eternal life: and now in this time, houses, and brothers, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecution and in the world to come everlasting life . Many that are first shall be last, and that are last shall be first.
I remember sitting on an Alaska airlines flight years ago where I brought along Book 10 of the Schaff Patristic series (not the online version but the actual hard cover book) where Origen's Commentary on Matthew was in the back and the Diatessaron on the front and it struck me absolutely naively and innocently that Origen's commentary followed the Diatessaron. I think this is yet another example from a part of the book which hadn't been translated into the English at the time. Clement's reference to the harmonized-Matthew is yet another piece of evidence. I think Origen had in his hands his master Ammonius's lost harmony which must have been called 'according to Matthew.' Our version of the Commentary on Matthew was reshaped by Eusebius to make it seem less 'heretical' (as already Jerome insinuates). We see similar Eusebian reworking in Contra Celsum and other works (notably the Apology).