No. The hypostatic union is unique to the Son.
If not, what does "partakers of divine nature" mean in the West? Again, from the exmaples you give ity is either a gross misinterpretation of 2 Pet 1:4, which merely states that we become sharers of divine character of God, but do not become God in essence, or it is a just a poor choice of words.
Where does the West say that that we become God in essence?
Good. Then how can we be partakers/receivers in/of the divine nature, as 2 Pet 1:4 translation, and Latin Rite statements suggest?
I am asking agian: What does it mean in the West that we are "partakers of the divine nature/essence?" Perhpas it's semantics, but it sounds raher as a conceptual divide with what the East teaches, and has taught through hasychastic fathers, the Cappadocian Fathers and tghe Desert Fathers.
Where does the West say that that we become God in essence?
In the way the Bible is translated and in Laitn Rite prayers you provided. Are we imbued with God's essence or with His creative energies?