The question is whether we take (or have taken) Jesus literally, but whether he intends his words to be taken literally.  

There is nothing in Jesus' very direct, clear words concerning divorce, or in the context in which he gave them, that can reasonably be taken as other than literal.  That there is some wiggle room on his other sayings, such as "if thine eye offend thee. . ." --- "some" wiggle room, indeed --- proves nothing.  Even to compare Jesus' teaching on divorce with his "advice" to "pluck it out" is absurd.  The latter is plainly metaphorical.  

That Jesus does not say those who divorce will be consigned to hellfire or excluded from the community does not diminish the directness and clarity of his commandment.  Jesus' commandments are not criminal statutes, which, unless they contain a penalty clause, are as though unwritten.  Reese, a lawyer, should know better. Telling us that Catholic teaching on divorce is false is an "America"-type thing to do.
Hasn't he learned?