The Gospel of Thomas and the Canon

So I'm leading a class on the Da Vinci Code in Catonsville, and prepping for it has been really interesting. There is so much in the book that's exaggeration and simplification, but Dan Brown throws enough fact in there that it's hard to be able to tell just by reading it what's real and what's not.

At any rate, I was reviewing the origins of the New Testament and wondering to myself what makes an ancient book worth keeping in the canon or throwing out. For example, the Gospel of Thomas (discovered a little over 50 years ago in Egypt) may have some early sayings in it that are faithful to Jesus' teachings, but that aren't in the canonical gospels. Of course, the real value in the Scriptures is not only in their age, but in the traditions that have built up around them. And in the way the Holy Spirit chooses to use or not use them. Could God speak to someone through the Gospel of Thomas? I think so. But is it a book that over time people have continually found helpful? Not in the existing Christian tradition. Of course there are other books that have nearly as much history in the tradition, but we don't include them in the canon either. What keeps them out? Their removed connection to Jesus? (1 Clement, for example, was written by someone who knew apostles but wasn't an apostle himself.)

Just something I've been considering today. No clear-cut answers just yet.

More information on the Gospel of Thomas