First lets get the quotes out the way...

In recent election cycles the IRS has upgraded its scrutiny of churches
and other charities, which risk losing their tax-free status if they
engage in partisan political activity or advocacy for a particular
candidate.

...

“The IRS, as it has in the past, wants to remind charities and churches
of the ban on political campaign activity. We also want to urge
nonprofit and religious organizations to review the guidance we have
issued to help them avoid any **problems** ,” [Steven T. Miller, commissioner of the IRS’ Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division,] cautioned.

Link >>

Source: Politico (emphasis added)

Okay, now comes the question... Who has authority to "reprimand" a church here in the good ole' USA for any kind of speech?

Obviously Steven T. Miller of the IRS thinks he has this authority
judging from his thinly veiled threat directed at all the churches in
this country. Where would he ever get the notion that he can do such a
thing? Well, that's just unAmerican isn't it.

Maybe from the Internal Revenue Code?

Many people
believe the IRS is the source of a church's tax exempt status and can
take away that status if it chooses to. The Constitution disagrees.
The First Amendment says:

Congress shall
make no law respecting
an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

The IRS is a creation of Congress.

Can't the IRS take away a churches tax exempt status?

Careful, it's a trick question. Churches are not "exempt" from
taxation, they are nontaxable and unregulable by any government agency by virtue
of the First Amendment. That is not the same thing as "tax exempt". An
exemption gives permission to avoid something that is normally
required by law. Churches are not bound to pay tax and cannot be
required to do so even if the IRS were to declare that a church no
longer had their "permission" to be "exempt". As you can see from this
logic the IRS has no claim of authority over taxing (or exempting for that matter) any churches at all
and they never will have so long as the First Amendment stands.

They do
have such authority over non-church charitable organizations though. In
fact they play a semantic game to confuse churches into thinking
that the IRS has some power over them like it does over charitable organizations like the Red Cross, but it is just a ruse. The
IRS cannot defeat the First Amendment and legally tax churches. Churches that
curtail their speech because of the threat of losing their "tax exemption" are sheepishly placing their ankles in the government regulation shackles that the framers of the First Amendment purposely sought to protect them from.

Now lets look at what the IRS doesn't like that churches are doing.
It boils down to speech, specifically political speech. Here is what the rest of the First Amendment says:

Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of
speech

That is quite a legal hurdle there isn't it. So since congress can
make no law in effect taxing a church, OR abridging the freedom of
speech, what is the IRS doing dictating what can be said from a church
pulpit under threat of taxation?

Did we miss somewhere along the way that a church (or list of
approved churches) were "established" by congress through the Internal
Revenue Code? It certainly sounds like it doesn't it. Let's look
further.

What is the IRS so afraid of that it would attempt to limit
church speech? Could it be a presidential candidate that has pledged
to put them out of business? Possibly.

But why attack churches? Why
would churches be a threat to the IRS?

Answer: Former Baptist Church
minister and now presidential candidate Mike Huckabee who has been
surging in the polls and pulling in money from... you guessed it... Christian church members. Now do you see it? The IRS is afraid of
Huckabee and wants to prevent church leaders from endorsing him and
raising money for him because if he gets elected, the IRS will be
shutdown for good.

Can we really do without the IRS? Sure we can, in fact we
can do without the income tax too. Taxing income is regressive anyway.
You know better how to spend your money than the IRS does. Wouldn't it
be better to have all of that money going into the economy rather than
to the IRS.

But, you ask, what will the government do without an income?
Don't worry the government has plenty of other taxes it takes in every
year and besides, none of your IRS "taxes" go to the US treasury
anyway, they go to the Federal Reserve to pay down the debt and
interest that the US government owes them.

What? you didn't know that
the US government pays interest to the Federal Reserve? What is it
doing paying interest to itself for? Uh, I guess you also didn't
know that the Federal Reserve is a private cooperation owned and run by
bankers and not a government agency owned by "we the people", did you.

Oh
man, if I were you, I would be getting really mad about now.

So since the money hasn't been going to the treasury anyway, the government won't miss it. Come to think of it, while we're at it, we could get rid of the Federal Reserve and all those Federal Reserve Notes that it prints. What would we use for money you ask? We'd print United States Notes like we used to. Remember the five dollar bills with the red serial numbers? Yup they were US Notes issued by the Treasury. So why did we ever need the Federal Reserve and its notes? Well... that's a really good question but if I tell you, you're going to get really, really mad and I don't want to see you blow a fuse.

Maybe when you've had a chance to take a breath and cool down, you can watch "The Money Masters - How International Bankers Gained Control of America" - Video >> and learn all about the Federal Reserve.