Scholars of religion continue to talk of syncretism where their colleagues have moved on to talk of hybridity. This paper reviews critiques of the latter concept and argues that 'hybridity' can be a useful concept, but only if further specified. I follow Peter Wade in distinguishing between hybridity of origin (the combination of pre--existing forms), and hybridity of encounter (the result of diasporic movements). I propose a third type, hybridity of refraction, in order to highlight the manner in which religious or cultural phenomena refract social tensions within a specific nation or society, resulting in a spectrum of ritual, doctrinal and/or religious forms. The typology is not meant to be complete or mutually exclusive: it suggests the value of adopting distinct, potentially overlapping, perspectives on hybridization. I illustrate the heuristic value of this approach with the case of Umbanda, a twentieth--century Brazilian religion. The interdisciplinarity of Religious Studies is a source of both strengths and weaknesses. The field draws fruitfully on concepts and theories from other disciplines, but it tends to do so late in the game and often uncritically. For a generation now, scholars of post--colonial and cultural studies, literary criticism, intellectual history, communications, qualitative sociology and other fields have used and critiqued the concept of "hybridity." Scholars of religion have covered some of the same ground in dealing with "syncretism," but the newer term offers distinct advantages and raises fresh problems. Given that "hybridity" appears poised to play a more prominent role in the study of religion-as scholars in the field increasingly research diasporic religion, draw on post--colonial theory, and so forth-this is an opportune moment to learn what lessons we can from the hybridity debates in other fields. "Hybridity" is valuable for four reasons: it reminds us that analyses of religious mixture must take into account broader cultural interactions, not just relations among those elements considered "religious"; it usefully highlights the prevalence, creativity and dynamism of cultural mixture, especially in our current global context; it reminds us that the study of contemporary religious phenomena requires attention to very specific historical, regional, and social contexts; and it reminds us to