The Canonical Criticism approach is based on an understanding that the cannon as it is formed in both the Old and New Testament has authority. This form of understanding and reading the scripture asserts that the final result is appropriate for use in communities because the process of forming the cannon years after the events themselves gives the scripture power and authority just as it is for use in Christian communities. This method also recognizes the Canon as it exists today as demonstrating the full historical revelation of God. The Canon is itself the interpretation of the story and the scripture is to be read as it is as truth. The goal of this form of criticism is simply to understand the scripture in its final form.
Brevard Childs is credited as the major theologian using this method, however he is known for not liking this term at all. The term was created by James Sanders. These are the two thinkers most known regarding this approach.

I am not totally sold on this theory, but to answer and address some questions. Yes, the cannon theory would completely reject Thomas (which I would not actually) as the canon is what it is and it is good as it is (this is the theory). Sometimes we get way too hung up in the canon process to the point where we demonize it. We see it as tainted because people were involved in creating the canon and the understanding of the scriptures, which is not much different than what any of these other theories are doing or what we do in this course in my mind. I have a trust of the Holy Spirit's ability to work and be present in the process of the canon and while God did not pen the scripture, God's hand was in it enough to move past the human issues and I think we too can and need to move past some of our issues with the human influence on the canon and really try and digest the deeper meaning. Just my thoughts as the oddball :)

Sterling-
These moments of agreement are increasing-what to make of this! :)
I too do not see this as a valid response either; and I think that like you too the scripture would not uphold this either. I cannot assume however to really understand how some that are marginalized feel about the Bible, so I have a sense of sadness in that regard.

Michael-

My belief is not so much about what the Bible can handle, as I think God can handle anything, but it seems to me that this theory is more about changing the Bible and putting our presuppositions in a place where we are not open to what the scripture says itself. The Bible does have to be understood in our culture and interpretation and understanding is work, but I have always believed the Bible should change us and give us understanding (it reads us) than it should be about us trying to fix our misunderstandings of the Bible based on our own biases.

Looks promising

This also looks very helpful, and the book looks good too!

This is a very complete source on Canonical Criticism. It is informative for my description and looks like a book worth buying.

This one looks really interesting (and expensive), a source to address the complications of the canon and the Old Testament.

Looks like this could be a good book on this type of criticism in a community context.