The Washington Post reported today that Senator Grassley is hot and bothered about the ministerial leadership of the Word of Faith Theology which, if I understand it at all, says that followers shall be rewarded materially (vs. spiritually) for their beliefs in the Church. 
 
We do know or surmise that:
a) followers are donating their hard earned money (and this is their free-will choice);
b)ministers are living very well; and,
c) the IRS approved the religious designation. 
 
And this is where Senator Grassley enters the scene.
Sen. Charles Grassley, believes that the pastors are not "complying with IRS rules that bar excessive personal gain through tax-exempt work".
 
In nonprofit governance speak, Sen. Grassley is challenging that the ministers are violating their duty of loyalty.  The standard for fulfilling this duty applies to nonprofit boards and staff.
 
Both the ministers and civil/religious liberty champions claim that Senator Grassley's real issues are with the theology and it is not in his purview as a US Senator to challenge religious beliefs and practices.
 
Seems like the better challenge is to understand the criteria that enabled these churches to pass as faith practices but if they met the standard the IRS uses to determine what exactly is "church" then the next best step for Sen. choosingy is to change the rules for what exactly is "church." 
 
Also, it is generally understood that religious organizations can create the governance structure of their chosing.  As we learned from the Darien Roman Catholic Church incident yesterday, even the most hierarchical faith practice can lack in accountability.  I believe that accountability is really the subject of Sen. Grassley's concerns. 
 
Perhaps it is how accountability is exercised within a faith practice that should be considered as part of an IRS determination.