Quoth Jowgen:

Does the specific-ness of the latter trump the general-ness of the prior? Surely there must be piece of RAW out there that resolves wheter the specific-trumps-general rule applies when a spell-application is referenced by something outside the spells description.
What specific-ness of the the latter? It doesn't say anything about whether the Miracle costs XP, just that it can be done with a Miracle. If it doesn't say, then we go by what the general rule says (which is, after all, the point of having a general rule). The general rule says it costs XP, and there's nothing that contradicts that, so it costs XP.