Hopkinsianism or Calvinism?

In an article titled "A Contrast Between Calvinism and Hopkinsianism," by Ezra Stiles Ely, and in Chapter Ten, in that section "Of Effectual Calling," the writer contrasts the views of the Hopkinsians with that of "Others," or of Hopkin's Hyper Calvinism versus historical creedal Calvinism.

According to the writer, the views of the Hopkinsians are described thusly:

"The divine operation in regeneration, of which the new heart is the effect, is immediate, or it is not wrought by the energy of any means as a cause of it but by the immediate power and energy of the Holy Spirit, It is called a creation, and the divine agency in it, is as much without a medium, as in creating something from nothing. Men are not regenerated, in the sense in which we are now considering regeneration, by light or the word of God." (yr. 1811)

See here

The views of Samuel Hopkins, together with those of Joseph Bellamy, were truly Hyper Calvinistic. Their regeneration before faith view was not readily accepted by all. Sadly, it was accepted and promoted by some able Baptists, such as Andrew Fuller. But, it was successfully refuted by other able Baptists, such as Abraham Booth.

Booth attacked Hopkins and his born again before faith error and his denial of means in regeneration. He also attacked Fuller for embracing the regeneration before faith error. Later, Alexander Campbell, with others, would attack this hybrid notion of the Hyper Calvinists.