What are you asking?
The word is a fine word, when it applies to things that have modes, like music, or literature.
I do not know what "concept" the modalists mean to identify by the word "mode" which is one of the reasons I object to the word in this case. The other is, it is not Scriptural, and all we need to know about God, God's nature, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Soirit are clearly taught in Scripture, and we don't need any words with vague meanings added by men to understand what God expects us to understand.
(Long sentence, huh?)
Listen, I can count, I know God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit add up to three, and I know these three are also the one God. I know God the Son is eternally God the Son, and that He became a man. I know that as a man on earth God the Son prayed to God the Father, and that another time God the Father made himself audibly heard with the words, "this is my Beloved Son, hear ye Him." How could these things be? I do not know, but I know the addition of a bunch of words invented by men to explain it do not make it any easier to understand.
I reject only the words and teachings of men and tradition. For this I am called a heretic. (To that I have no objection. Puts me in very good company.) Go read what Jesus had to say about man's teachings and traditions.
Hank
Was a Divine Person distinct from God the Son, listening to Jesus' prayer?
and that another time God the Father made himself audibly heard with the words, "this is my Beloved Son, hear ye Him."
Was a Divine Person distinct from God the Son, speaking?
I know that as a man on earth God the Son prayed to God the Father,