In this article by Kenny Pearce, a particular concept of miracle is defended: Most accounts of miracles assume that a necessary condition for an event’s being miraculous is that it be, as Hume put it, “a violation of the laws of nature,” or, at least, that it should not follow from the laws of nature. However, any account of this sortwill be ill-suited for defending the major Western religious traditions because, Pearce argues, classical theists are under significant pressure to reject such lawless events. In place of the rejected lawlessness accounts, this paper seeks to develop and defend a Leibnizian conception of miracles on which an event is said to be miraculous just in case we can discover its final cause but not its efficient cause.